Whom do you think Are Cinemas One Hit Wonders ?

BAYLOR

There Are Always new Things to Learn.
Joined
Jun 29, 2014
Messages
23,648
Actors , Actresses, Directors , Producers who had a great initial success , which they were never able to duplicate and why ?
 
Last edited:
The one that springs to mind for me is the Wachowski brothers. After the excellent job they did on The Matrix, I don't think they've been able to match it since. As to the why - well in the next two Matrix films, I think they just disappeared up their own rectums and took themselves far too seriously. In fact, I'll go further - if ever a film did not need to be a trilogy, it was The Matrix.

As for the rest of their work, it's not been really bad but just chugged along in the average to mediocre area. Probably caused by something akin to second album syndrome suffered by many musicians.

I've yet to see Cloud Atlas so might have to eat my words if it turns out to be a really great film.
 
I like Bound much more than The Matrix, though I like it, too. The Matrix is a good skiffy movie but Bound is a great neo-noir stylish gangster flick. So that gives 'em two in my book, with The Matrix being second. (But, obviously, Bound was nowhere near the "hit" The Matrix was objectively.)

I'm not sure if these are exactly one-hit wonders, either, but there's a lot of weird SF-ish flicks - The Rocky Horror Picture Show - because how can anything compare to that? How can you "do it again"? (They apparently tried and failed.) Maybe stuff like Buckaroo Banzai (again, too crazy) and even Repo Man (though I might change my mind if I ever got around to seeing Sid and Nancy).

In terms of actors, in a personal sense, there's Tom Cruise in Risky Business - that's the only film I can stand him in - barely.

And, dozens of movies and millions of bucks later, I still don't think Sylvester Stallone ever came close to the writing or acting in Rocky again. Rocky, both fictionally and really, was an underdog thing rising out of the grit of the 70s and anticipating the glitz of the 80s and was complex. Most everything else was overdog simplicities without much, um, true grit. Rocky was kinda small and most everything else was kinda huge. Etc.
 
I like Bound much more than The Matrix, though I like it, too. The Matrix is a good skiffy movie but Bound is a great neo-noir stylish gangster flick. So that gives 'em two in my book, with The Matrix being second. (But, obviously, Bound was nowhere near the "hit" The Matrix was objectively.)

I have Bound but not got round to watching it yet. Glad to hear it's good!

As for the question, I can't really think of any. George Lazenby?
 
Has anyone had a steeper fall from grace than M Night Shymalan? Although I think Unbreakable is a fabulous film.
 
Has anyone had a steeper fall from grace than M Night Shymalan? Although I think Unbreakable is a fabulous film.
I was in a theatre for the end of Village. First time I've ever seen the entire audience do a facepalm.
 
Wachowski brothers: I though V for Vendetta was decent, (not brilliant or extremely good I admit).

I read though that they are possibly going to go ahead with another Matrix trilogy. I fear that will be a mistake.

M Night Shymalan. Yep the wheels fell off his movies pretty early in his career. (Aliens who can't stand liquid water, invade a planet that clearly from space must have a lot of the stuff sloshing about ?!?!?)

New nomination:

Richard Kelly who début with Donnie Darko? Perhaps not a commercial success, but definitely critical success.

To be fair to him, I haven't seen anything else he's made (But I see they've not gone down well: Southland tales, the Box, Domino) so my reasoning is that after making something so blinking marvellous as DD it really does seem to be outshining everything he's tried since.
 
Oh another nomination, (shaving does indeed help you think - thank you Niels Bohr)

Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez for inflicting on the world The Blair Witch Project and hence the whole modern genre of found footage horrors.

I didn't understand why it did so well, I thought it was tedious.
 
In a certain sense, the great Charles Laughton, because he only directed one film, but it's a great one -- Night of the Hunter.

On a much lower level, Arch Hall jr., who was a terrible leading man in things like Eegah!, is excellent as a nasty killer in The Sadist.
 
Absolutely agree with Victoria about Night of the Hunter. Such a pity that Laughton did not have the opportunity to direct again.

Two others stand out for me:
Michael Cimino, the Deer Hunter. One of the great films of all time. Then a spectacular crash with Heaven's Gate. A crash he did not recover from.

Dennis Hopper, Easy Rider. Yes, he made other films but in none of those was he given the same creative freedom that he had in Rider. Pity.
 
Michael Cimino, the Deer Hunter. One of the great films of all time. Then a spectacular crash with Heaven's Gate. A crash he did not recover from.
.

Many years ago I was in a local cinema club that got to run full copies of movies in a larger cinema than they could fill. "Heaven's Gate" was quite something but it probably needs to be seen several times before you can get enough of it to figure out what was going on. Add to that, it was massively over budget and cinemas wouldn't play the whole thing (5+ hours) or anything close to that.
 
Many years ago I was in a local cinema club that got to run full copies of movies in a larger cinema than they could fill. "Heaven's Gate" was quite something but it probably needs to be seen several times before you can get enough of it to figure out what was going on. Add to that, it was massively over budget and cinemas wouldn't play the whole thing (5+ hours) or anything close to that.

That film hasn't gotten better with age. ;)
 
The one that springs to mind for me is the Wachowski brothers. After the excellent job they did on The Matrix, I don't think they've been able to match it since. As to the why - well in the next two Matrix films, I think they just disappeared up their own rectums and took themselves far too seriously. In fact, I'll go further - if ever a film did not need to be a trilogy, it was The Matrix.

As for the rest of their work, it's not been really bad but just chugged along in the average to mediocre area. Probably caused by something akin to second album syndrome suffered by many musicians.

I've yet to see Cloud Atlas so might have to eat my words if it turns out to be a really great film.

In my opinion, they are doing rather well. Not just Cloud Atlas, but their lesser known ones like Speed Racer - the Wachowski siblings (it is not brothers anymore, it is brother/sister now) are at the point where they can make the films they want to without having to be quite as worried about the box office. Obviously, they would still like to have the films be successful. But they are able to pick and choose their projects based on what interests them. This makes them feel like they are not as 'around' as they were. But that was just due to the sheer magnitude of Matrix fame.

And actually, I prefer this season of their career as I am not a Matrix fan. :p

As to the original post, I would say almost the entire decade of mainstream films in the 80s. It was filled with flashes in the pan.
 
Zach Snyder... 300 was better than it had a right to be, watchmen wasn't a total failure, and he's been nothing but garbage since.
 
John McTiernan of Predator fame also did Hunt for Red October and I think the first Die Hard. He has since made luke warm movies after those hits.
 
But that's three hits. :) (Never was a big fan of Predator but I love the other two.)
 
John McTiernan of Predator fame also did Hunt for Red October and I think the first Die Hard. He has since made luke warm movies after those hits.


Id like to see him do a new Predator film.:)
 
The one that springs to mind for me is the Wachowski brothers. After the excellent job they did on The Matrix, I don't think they've been able to match it since. As to the why - well in the next two Matrix films, I think they just disappeared up their own rectums and took themselves far too seriously. In fact, I'll go further - if ever a film did not need to be a trilogy, it was The Matrix.

As for the rest of their work, it's not been really bad but just chugged along in the average to mediocre area. Probably caused by something akin to second album syndrome suffered by many musicians.

I've yet to see Cloud Atlas so might have to eat my words if it turns out to be a really great film.


Speed Race didn't exactly burn up the box office but , It wasn't a bad film

The Matrix is that it really isn't aging well.
 

Back
Top