MovieChat Forums > Witness (1985) Discussion > Why is this ranked so low? One of the g...

Why is this ranked so low? One of the great movies of our time

posted 16 years ago by music_man_fan
32 replies | jump to latest

I saw it again for the first time in 10 years and it was even more powerful than the first time. Witness moved me more than Romeo and Juliet. I think the chemistry between the 2 main characters is the greatest I've ever seen on film.

And yet this movie is so much more than that. The cultural difference between 2 people who live only miles away from each other was a pure eye opener. It's a great contrast for those who want to understand America. It's drama, it's perfect timing humor, and it's heart make it a great film.

If you've never had a chance to see this movie, go and see it. Try to watch it on the best viewing experience you can.

I wonder why this movie gets such a low rating? Is it because of the beautiful deliberate pacing that reflects the Amish way of life? Is it that many Americans see themselves as those kids who made fun of the Amish? Females under 18 only rated this film a 5.1? Wow! That doesn't make any sense to me. Anyone know why?

Truly a great American movie, though.

[–] bendipa 16 years ago

I don't know. 7.6 is a very good rating. I'd say the rating is about right.
I loved the film, but then any film directed by Aussie, Peter Weir is usually going to be rather special.

[–] AssetsonFire 16 years ago

The 'Females under 18' phenomenon is apparently common to most, if not all, films on IMDb.

I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?

[–] music_man_fan 16 years ago

So are you saying IMDB attracts the bitchiest interent females?

[–] AssetsonFire 16 years ago

I don't know why it is, whether it's some kind of glitch or secret conspiracy. Just try looking at some other films and see if you notice the same thing.

I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?

[–] Madluke91 16 years ago

7.6 is not a bad rating at all. In my eyes that does mean the film what pretty damn good, but possibly just not for everyone, or slightly flawed, or lacked a stand out acting performance, or many other reasons...

Top 5 movies:A Clockwork Orange, Goodfellas, Seven Samurai, The Dark Knight, Dead Man's Shoes.

[–] gnolti 16 years ago

The Amish Factor. Great film, great performances, great story -- but the fact is that most Americans don't know squat about the Amish; may not believe they really exist; and if they do, can't quite grasp the web of ironies, contradictions, and fascination in the idea of a 17th century people living alongside a 20th century world. For that matter, can't grasp the idea of 17th century people, period.

There, daddy, do I get a gold star?

[–] HHFan 15 years ago

They are children. Perhaps they don't understand a grown up film.

--
Lets nuke the site from orbit - its the only way to be sure.

[–] PotassiumMan 16 years ago

This movie was under-appreciated when it first came out. The New York Times film critics were just as clueless than as they are now.

[–] jockey-1 16 years ago

I am glad to see your post, because I had that sense, too: that even at 7.6, it is underappreciated.

Things that make this film outstandingly good:

It is immaculately paced, particularly the second half.
Kelly McGillis is stunning, as is her performance, character and the relationship with Book.
Harrison Ford is too cool for school.
The understanding and appreciation given the Amish is uniquely sensitive.

This list could go on.... Put simply, though, I think it is one of the greatest of all time. It is certainly much better than many I see on IMDb's top 250.

[–] TomBon1 16 years ago

i have to agree. When I think about films like the Usual Suspects being in the top 25 and this is probably not even in the top 1000. It makes me wonder why people on IMDB have so little taste.

[–] RoseNylan 16 years ago

Im pretty sure it was in the top 250 as recently as 2002.

[–] jockey-1 16 years ago

Ah, right. Thanks for the info.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Douglas-11 16 years ago

I think all online surveys are susceptible to this; look at those surveys they ran around the time of the new millenium - "Greatest music of the last millenium" etc and you would always find teeny-boppers voting for the latest ringtone. Teenagers are very much living in the "now" and also more likely to vote at the drop of a hat ;-)

Personally I think Witness has a pace and interplay of subject matters that you need a few years on you to appreciate. If you get it, it's a great film. If you can't relate to it, it's probably two hours of boring hell.

I'm surprised and not surprised by the initial critics reaction.

BTW I thought The Usual Suspects was an excellent movie, but I think Witness is an excellent movie too.

[–] saxondale7 16 years ago

I'd say its the fact that it changes from a straight police procedural to a film on the Amish way of life. Just watched it tonight, and it is exceptional.

In Britain we have a saying; difficult, difficult ... lemon ... difficult.

[–] nigelgtx 16 years ago

To the OP: you are right, I just gave it a 10/10
Cheers

[–] BigMamou 16 years ago

OTOH - females over 45 give this movie an 8.2. I guess 27 more years of experience adds up to more depth and appreciation of subtle themes. As to its overall low rating - it is slow in parts (which I happen to appreciate in this film) and there IS a kind of alien quality to the Amish characters. Maybe Mr. Weir should have thrown in a few high powered car chases and a bomb or 2? I gave it a 10 and I haven't even seen it in 20 years! I think about it often though and I've written (in my head) several alternate endings for it.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] timmy_501 15 years ago

I wonder why this movie gets such a low rating? Is it because of the beautiful deliberate pacing that reflects the Amish way of life?

It probably has something to do with the filmsy plot. Book stayed in the Amish community for a much longer time than he had to in spite of the fact that he was putting lives in danger. That doesn't make much sense. Later, after he works on his car and fails to fix it he tries to make a getaway in it even though he knows it won't work. He does something to draw attention to himself when he's supposed to be in hiding and then fails to keep his gun on him. Meanwhile, the bad guys are so inept that they don't even bother to come looking for him until it's too late.

I still think it was a good film but not phenomenal.

This is not a signature.

[–] cjgalwey 15 years ago

These are all valid points, but nearly all action movies have holes of this kind in the plots if you look closely enough.

[–] MuchToBeGratefulFor 15 years ago

He does something to draw attention to himself when he's supposed to be in hiding

That was not an optimal thing for Book to do, but the fact that he did it is hardly a weakness of the plot. Remember that he has just learned that his colleague/friend was killed for protecting him, and he has just called the chief and threatened him. He has a lot of simmering rage when he gets off the phone, and those thugs picking on the Amish set him off. And he didn't have his gun on him because Rachel demanded he turn it over, after she caught him showing it to her son.

Meanwhile, the bad guys are so inept that they don't even bother to come looking for him until it's too late.

Uh, they WERE looking for him. But all they knew (because Book's friend destroyed all the information) was the boy's last name, and the police in that area said there were tons of families with that name. They had nothing to go on, until Book drew attention to himself in town. That's why they showed when they did.

How long did Book actually stay? It didn't seem that long given that he had to heal. He was preparing to leave when the bad guys finally found him.

In short, I completely disagree that there was a flimsy plot. I was a very well-constructed plot. It requires people to pay attention, which is why it gets low marks from a lot of people.

You must be the change you seek in the world. -- Gandhi

[–] timmy_501 15 years ago

but the fact that he did it is hardly a weakness of the plot

The film situates him as an intelligent person but then he does something to draw attention to himself and then doesn't immediately leave the area. I can understand that he might make the first mistake but the second is too much to believe.

Uh, they WERE looking for him.

No, they didn't bother to come looking for him for the reason you state. I understand that there was a lot of area to cover and not that much to go on but they didn't even try. Considering the controversy his presence caused it would have been fairly easy to find him if they just had one person check each community.

It didn't seem that long given that he had to heal

He was healed enough to work in the community long before he left.

It requires people to pay attention, which is why it gets low marks from a lot of people.

Actually, accepting this plot would require people not to pay attention.

I'm going where there's no depression

[–] music_man_fan 15 years ago

Very nice discussion going on here. Not always found on the IMDB boards these days.

To the youngsters who love great movies: If Witness comes around to an Art House movie theatre near you, go see it. It truely is stunning in a theatre.

[–] the_radical_one1 14 years ago

Quite simply put it is a decent movie, nothing more, nothing less. It is not "one of the greatest films of our time" at all. Was this movie really deserving of an Oscar nomination for Best Picture? Did it deserve to win Best Original Screenplay over a film like Brazil? The answers to those questions are no and no by the way. So by that theory a 7.6 is an extremely high rating for this film, be happy with it. What, you think it should be a 9.2 or something?

"Have you paid your dues Jack? Yes sir, the check is in the mail."

[–] BwlBoy 14 years ago

Dear me! Labelling this a decent film is completely insulting to a great director such as Peter Weir. It's extremely well made and by all accounts a score of 7.6 is anything but high if you analyse how good the acting and direction is. If the average rating was over 8 this would be a fair reflection of the film's quality.