What Are Some Films That Were Well Reviewed on Release But Developed Reputations as Bad Movies Later On?
Off the top of my head I can think of:
Days of Thunder- Probably the biggest example of this and what inspried this thread. When Days of Thunder was released in 1990s, it was a huge box office success and released to overall good reviews. No one ever considered it an Oscar winner or the next Godfather but it was consider a good if not a great Popcorn film. Both Siskel and Ebert gave it good reviews (Ebert gave it 3 out of 4 stars). The movie was praised for it's special effects, stunt work, cinematography (the best of any Tony Scott movie) and the on-screen surrogate father-son chemistry of Tom Cruise and Robert Duvall.
However, by the early 2000s, Days of Thunder developed a reputation as a bad movie. Retro-respective reviews panned it. Fans on the internet bashed it. It had an awful raiting for years in the low 5s (maybe even high 4s) on IMDB and even NASCAR fans claimed they hated it and thought it was a dumb movie. I've even seen retro-respective reviews list it as Tom Cruise and Tony Scott's worst movies.
The Godfather Part 3- When The Godfather Part 3 was released, it was always considered not as good as it's two predecessors. But for the most part critics of the day gave it great reviews. Sure there are flaws. The cousin thing is weird. And Sofia Coppola did not want to be there (was supposed to be Winona Ryder. I always wonder if Marisa Tomei would have done well in the role). Much like Days of Thunder, by the early 2000s, The Godfather Part 3 developed a reputation as a bad movie. Most of the retro-respective reviews and fan hate seems to center on Sofia Coppola's performance.
Return of the Jedi - This might be the best example. Return of the Jedi was released to glowing reviews and critical acclaim across the board. The movie was universally loved by fans and critics alike. For many years, the argument of the best Star Wars film was not between A New Hope (then just called Star Wars) and Empire but between Empire and Jedi. This can even be seen in Clerks when Randal most famously asked which movie Dante liked better Empire or Jedi. Dante responds with Empire to which Randal responds with "blasphemy!"
I feel like most of the hate for Return of the Jedi is due to it almost having a "Seinfeld isn't Funny" effect. When Return of the Jedi was released in 1983, it was the first time we saw a green lightsaber, the first time we saw a large scale Space Battle with two entire fleets going at it, the first time we saw Jabba the Hut, the first time we saw the Emperor in person and force lightning. All of that stuff has since kind of entered into pop culture. In the case of Fleet vs Fleet space battles it became common starting in the 90s with games like Wing Commander, shows like Deep Space 9 and Babylon 5 as well into the 2000s with things such as Battlestar Galactica, Halo, Mass Effective, etc. It just became a normal depiction.
Also the edits from the "Special Editions" in my opinion hurt Return of the Jedi the most. Both the added editions of Return of the Jedi were awful. Not only that but Jabba showing up in ANH and the Emperor of course in the prequels kind of ruins the revivals in Jedi.
Also I feel like younger audiences that often watch Star Wars in chronological order and not release order, strongly get the "Seinfeld isn't funny effect" from Jedi. I've also seen posts on r/StarWars from people claiming that when their friends went to see Jedi in theaters in 1983, all of them universally hated it and everyone walked out thinking it was a bad movie. Or claiming they remember how disappointed everyone was back in 83 with Jedi. To me this sounds like revisionist history.
What other films have had this effect?