Forums: Vincent D'Onofrio Board: Vincent and the critics

Is it just me, or does anyone else find that VDO seems to have been in a number of movies that were trashed by critics, but which were actually good movies?

From Rotten Tomatoes:

The Thirteenth Floor - 30%
Impostor - 16%
Feeling Minnesota - 17%
The Cell - 42%

I liked all of these movies. I thought Impostor was a solid sci-fi action movie with a lot of flaws, but which was entertaining, well-done, well-acted, and thoughtful overall. The Cell had a bit of the "Hollywood schlock" factor to it, but yet was a movie I found to be beautiful, thought-provoking, and intelligent. It was thoroughly entertaining and does what good movies do--gave the viewer a chance to see people and the world in a different way.

I thoroughly enjoyed Feeling Minnesota from beginning to end. I'd say it's a "flawed" movie, not "flawed" in the sense that it needed more work (like Impostor), but "flawed" in the sense that it's very rough around the edges--which I like in a movie. It managed to buck a lot of cliches in that it didn't stick to any particular formula--it was funny and unsettling in equal measure, which I think is a fantastic quality. It resonated with me long after watching it, and I think it features a lot of insights into the human condition.

I thought The Thirteenth Floor was very good, and I think it was more successful in a lot of ways than other movies that explored similar themes such as existenZ and The Matrix, not in the sense that it was necessarily a better movie than either of those, but in that it was a bit more emotionally complex and had a lot of nuance to it that those movies didn't have. It had the sci-fi tech exploration, a romantic quality, a shadowy noir feel, a philosophical edge, a sense of mystery... Wasn't a perfect movie, but the characters felt more "real" to me than in either of the aforementioned movies, which helped to heighten the impact of some of the movie's philosophical explorations.

I understand why critics struggled with these movies and didn't universally praise them. They're difficult, experimental, genre-crossing sort of movies, which generally don't do well with critics. But yet it still galls me that some of the most abysmal Hollywood shlock can get a lot more "benefit of the doubt," and at least get mid-range critical approval, than movies that go out on a limb to experiment with the medium and the message. I would much rather see a movie that's a bit rough and wild that really challenges me in some way than to see some mediocre, slick, Hollywood re-hash.

I don't give that much power to critics when it comes to deciding what I watch, but I do take the critical consensus into account in my choices to some extent. So I was expecting to quickly get frustrated with all of the "low quality" movies I'd have to watch to see more of D'Onofrio as an actor, and have been surprised at how much that has not been the case. What frustrates me is that I feel it's unfair to Vincent that his body of work has been cast in a certain light by critics when it's not even an accurate reflection of the quality of the movies he's been in. Not that I'm exactly losing sleep over it, but it does seem to me a lot of the movies he's been in weren't given a fair shake.

The Hollywood Critics trash most of D'Onofrio's movies, because he refuses to become a part of the "click"... He doesn't attend premieres unless he's actually in the movie, doesn't party with the celebrity bunch. Vincent would rather spend quality time with his wife and children. I do admire a man that takes time with his family! Thankfully, "Law & Order: Criminal Intent" has made Vincent D'Onofrio very popular and recognizable now!! (maybe the reason he moved from his condo in NY???)