We've all felt it. That sensation of being pleasantly surprised by a film that we predicted would be awful. A genuine feeling that a movie we had written off is actually deserving of praise. It doesn't happen too often (not nearly as much as the other way around) but when it does, it should be recognised. That is what I am attempting to do here, picking three such films that struck me in this way. I certainly won't be universally praising these films, but will make a point of explaining why I enjoyed them far more than I expected to.
Bowfinger
Eddie Murphy, Steve Martin. Kings of comedy, right? Yes, in 1984! On the surface, this film appears to be the ultimate in throwaway nonsense. Two washed up comedians starring in a bland looking film with an elaborate plot. I would forgive anyone for being decidedly 'meh' when faced with this film. But, amazingly- it's very good. It has more laugh out loud moments than a dozen other comedies put together, Murphy and Martin are on top form and the writing (Martin again) is excellent.
Of course it's not all flawless. The plot relies too much on coincidence and there are no fully developed character arks, they are the same hammy stereotypes at the end of the film than they were at the beginning. Furthermore, the film never quite makes its mind up about who its target audience is. At first it seems like a jolly family romp but then sub plots involving an actress who methodically sleeps with cast and crew to further her career, or Kitt's references to racial slurs, push this into an adult sphere that the film never quite sits right in. Finally, if I'm being picky, the 'Fake Purse Ninjas' epilogue is a step too far.
However, it is this film's refusal to conform that makes it so good. By eschewing conventions of plot, character and context, Bowfinger delivers a surprising and refreshing experience and elevates itself from being the run of the mill jaunt you expect, to becoming a comedy classic.
Why shouldn't it work?
Washed up comedians, elaborate plot that doesn't do as it's told.
Why is it better than it should be?
Original and refreshing experience, with BIG laughs.
Atonement
It shouldn't be good, it just shouldn't! Everything about the trailer for this film turned me off. Period costume? Check. Gloomy world war setting? Yup. Heavy emphasis on romance? Oh yes! Even the shot of Kiera Knightley soaking wet wasn't enough to get me down to the local Vue.
But then, I was a victim of circumstance. Sitting on the sofa on a rainy Sunday afternoon, flicking through the 'anytime' recordings, I spotted it and decided to take a chance. I'm so glad I did, as this film is very good.
Of course the acting, effects and sets are all of Hollywood standard but the best thing here is that the film absolutely refuses to be the tale you fear it may be.
The plot is tremendously engaging, you really care about the characters and what happens to them. The curve balls thrown in are references to child molestation, an amazing twist that turns the whole thing on its head and, in one hilarious sequence, gratuitous use of the 'c' word! Jane Austin would be turning in her tuberculosis ridden grave. Fantastic.
Throw in just the right amount of war action and genuine catharsis and you've got a modern classic that proudly bucks the trend for its genre. Of course, a soaking wet Kiera doesn't hurt either...
Why shouldn't it work?
Dreary looking, period piece style war romance.
Why is it better than it should be?
Engaging plot, great drama and swearing.
Shane
A 1950's technicolor cowboy film? Lord, save us! But bear with me here, this film is excellent.
Maybe you think that westerns begin and end with Leone's 'Dollars' trilogy? Maybe you're not a fan of the genre at all? I had shared both these views when I watched Shane for the first time. Even the conditions were wrong, I was obliged to watch it for a University project- not always the best grounds for enjoyment. But enjoy it I did, very much so.
If your western diet has mainly consisted of the spaghetti variety, then be prepared for a very different experience here. Shane may not exude the same gritty showdowns or ambivalent anti-heroes as Sergio's offerings, but it would be a massive error to presume that it does not contain the pace, excitement or passion. If you want to read a more in depth stylistic comparison between Shane and the films of Sergio Leone, I have previously written an essay on the topic, which I will post a link to.
For now, let's stick to why else this film is so good. Forget your preconceptions. You think because it's 50 years old that it's not violent? Wrong, there are bar-room brawls and gun fights to satisfy your blood lust. You think it will be too long and dialogue heavy? Wrong, at a sprightly 118 minutes. it makes The Good, The Bad and The Ugly seem like a bloated Mexican of a film. The dialogue is snappy and essential, with just the right balance of character developing conversations and rootin' tootin' fighting talk. Perhaps you think that a film of this age could only contain bland, old fashioned characters? Wrong again my little friends. Shane is a fantastic hero, he comes out of the wilderness and brings that dark side with him, meaning he has the edge to fight off the antagonists. He's not a bad guy but has some of their traits and is not fully good either. Shane returns to the wilderness when the job is done but not unscathed. He is a far more interesting character than many of today's heroes.
Shane paved the way long before The Man With No Name rode into town with his mule and poncho and inspired a new generation of European Wild West directors. That's why despite appearing dull, Shane is a classic.
Why shouldn't it work?
Old cowboy film with no Clint?
Why is it better than it should be?
The character of Shane and it's influential legacy.
I hope you enjoyed reading this article. I definitely derived pleasure from writing it. It was an interesting process deciding which three films to cover. If I were to include more, I would probably choose 3 colours red, on the waterfront and old school. My criteria was that I may have watched it begrudgingly but even if I was willing, my expectations were very low. In the end, not only was I pleasantly surprised but the film even became one of my favourites within its respective genre. Please share your thoughts below as to whether you agree with my choices, or offer up some of your own based on my criteria.
Steff.
Welcome to Deluded, the blog by Steff Parry where I pretend that people give a crap about what I think. Here I will cover topics such as film, technology, video games and whatever else is on my mind. Please feel free to add your comments below or drop me a line on 
