Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Overrated and disappointing films

Options
13468914

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,511 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    Wolf of Wall Street....granted I never sat down to watch it fully, but I just see a lot of cliched Scorsese stuff in it. Its like a remake of Goodfellas except on Wall Street. Good times, excess, etc followed by downfall and Feds going in arresting everyone.

    A lot of Spielberg movies are over-rated, virtually everything post Saving Private Ryan.

    But you just know if its got Spielberg on the label, the oscars will love it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,181 ✭✭✭Mike Litoris


    The Dark Knight. Superhero stuff isn't my thing but I really enjoyed Begins. I thought TDK was a mess.

    Jerry McGuire. after 45 minutes or so I couldn't take Cruises hammy acting and went for a brandy.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,446 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Personally I always feel you surrender your right to call a film good, bad or indifferent if you don’t do the absolute minimum due diligence of actually watching it, let alone call it ‘overrated’!



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,511 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    I've probably seen the full film but not in one sitting if that makes sense.

    If it was good I'd make a point of watching it from start to finish.

    You can't force someone to watch a film in one sitting if they don't like it.

    This thread is about films people find over-rated, and yes several posters gave up on films half way through, which is their right.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,954 ✭✭✭mikemac2


    Lost in Translation

    Bill Murray / Scarlett Johannson

    Won a stack of awards and got rave reviews. I thought it was muck



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,954 ✭✭✭mikemac2




  • Registered Users Posts: 862 ✭✭✭lumphammer2


    The ending of Titanic was good ... makes one wonder why the lead up and why the overconcentration on the unrealistic romance ....

    Top Gun is defo a film not as great as its reputation ... I do not think it is overly critically acclaimed but caught the imagination of film audiences both then and now ... it does have some awful characters which was so typical of 1980s films ... Top Gun was defo inspired by someone from the Vietnam war I have read/heard ... I did not watch it for years but there is an aerial battle at the end ... I know it is defo set in the 1980s but there are some songs in it from the Vietnam war era and one from 1957/58 by (Imelda May's first influence) Eddie Cochran IIRC ... I assumed Vietnam revisit? The type of thing Rambo did? ... or is it Iran or Libya who are at war with America?? ... I do not remember if anything was actually said about who was fighting this war ... I did not see the second one but may give it a go ....

    Crusade I agree has way too much comedy ... yes I like it but prefer Raiders and Temple way more ... Temple is so underrated ... I feel Temple had horror elements in it and Raiders had to a lesser extent ... and both had some comedy in it but emphasised the action and suspense far more ... I guess Crusade was more of a reaction to those who wanted a much more family friendly Indy experience ... the horror elements are toned down greatly in Crusade and it is tame stuff compared to the first two albeit I still like it ...

    Citizen Kane is good ... the story I agree may not be overly interesting but it is made interesting by how the film is done ... singling out one film as the greatest ever made be it this or any other film is futile ... because there are several genres and eras ... Citizen Kane, Empire Strikes Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Goldfinger, Mad Max 2, Casablanca, Bladerunner, and several more are all candidates for greatest films ever in different genres ... and there are likely 1000s of greatest films ever made because all are unique ..



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,726 ✭✭✭Arne_Saknussem


    He's right thou, it's an overlong, repetitive & very boring.



  • Registered Users Posts: 862 ✭✭✭lumphammer2


    I like Batman ... he is one of the few superheroes who is interesting ... unlike that Shazam! thing ... prob part of the reason was I was expecting Persian Batman but instead got child turning into a man ... Batman Begins is one I really enjoyed too ... though I enjoyed The Dark Knight as well I feel Begins was even better ... afterall we all know the Batman v Joker story at this stage but Begins offered a rare glimpse into how Batman became Batman in detail ... it filled a lot of gaps in for us ...



  • Registered Users Posts: 862 ✭✭✭lumphammer2


    Spielberg at his best is essential viewing for me ... Jaws .. the first 2 Indiana Jones ... Schindler's List ... are all great imv ... but yes of course even the best end up doing films that get overrated or overhyped because of the link to the director ...



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,527 ✭✭✭✭Dav010




  • Registered Users Posts: 26,082 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Just on Citizen Kane.

    How a movie is made does not make it a good movie. I shouldn't have to watch a making of documentary to "get it"

    Bit of a pretentious Ulysses vibe off the idea.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,954 ✭✭✭mikemac2


    My contribution was Lost in Translation

    Immediately above quoting you ^^^



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,476 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    "Insert any acclaimed movie from last 80 years here".

    State that it's total rubbish without any logic or reasoning.

    Leave thread and feel edgy and hard.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,758 ✭✭✭I see sheep


    I love Wolf of Wall Street.

    Agree 100% on Spielberg, nearly all his movies are good but never great (apart from Jaws/Schindler's List). He's the Mason Mount of directors.



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,476 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    So Speilberg never makes any great films apart from 2 which for some reason don't count? Bizarre logic.

    Also, he was robbed of an Oscar for ET for the very much over rated Gandhi.



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,476 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    So you're critiquing a film you've never seen and comparing it negatively to another film just because of the director.

    As for Spielberg, ridiculous comment. Lincoln and Bridge of Spies are both commendable films.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,789 ✭✭✭speedboatchase


    Can we make a note that people should at least watch the entire movie they've selected for this thread? Geez.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,649 ✭✭✭flasher0030


    This thread was always going to turn into a bashing of good films somewhere along the line. Some people just trying to be different to be "cool". Or others just throwing it out there to get a rise. e.g. tobefrank's take on Wolf of Wall Street. He/she can't remember for certain if he actually watched it, but still feels that he is in a position to give an opinion that it is overrated. Like those "experts" saying a movie is crap - a movie they switched off after 15 minutes.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,758 ✭✭✭I see sheep


    They do count, that's why I mentioned them 🤷‍♂️

    He's way over rated though, he's not terrible but it's laughable some people consider him the greatest director ever.

    ET is total garbage.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 508 ✭✭✭JKerova1


    Oppenheimer. Banshees of Inisherin.



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,476 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    He has a a very distinct and far reaching filmography with a lot of range. I think he deserves a lot of credit.

    Your comment on ET is just ludicrous and makes your post hard to take serious.



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,583 ✭✭✭✭2smiggy


    a wide variety of excellent films added to the overrated and disappointing films list. patiently waiting for someone to air their grievances about the Shawshank Redemption



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,082 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    That happened back in the first few pages.

    Also covered at the time was the fact you can believe Shawshank is both very good and also overrated. Overrated does not mean bad.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,325 ✭✭✭Man Vs ManUre


    I thought Moonlight the recent Oscar winner was a load of manure.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,298 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    @lumphammer2

    Top Gun is defo a film not as great as its reputation ... I do not think it is overly critically acclaimed but caught the imagination of film audiences both then and now ... it does have some awful characters which was so typical of 1980s films ... Top Gun was defo inspired by someone from the Vietnam war I have read/heard ... I did not watch it for years but there is an aerial battle at the end ... I know it is defo set in the 1980s but there are some songs in it from the Vietnam war era and one from 1957/58 by (Imelda May's first influence) Eddie Cochran IIRC ... I assumed Vietnam revisit? The type of thing Rambo did? ... or is it Iran or Libya who are at war with America?? ... I do not remember if anything was actually said about who was fighting this war ... I did not see the second one but may give it a go ....

    Maverick, the character, is loosely based on a F-4 pilot, IIRC, and Mitchell's father served in Vietnam with his CO. But other than that Vietnam isn't really part of the movie in any solid way. I suppose one could say it's a hangover from the American defeat in some manner, but it's not as overt as something like the atrocious 'Rambo', which was just Regan era trash where the US gets to "right the wrongs" of its past. However, the enemies in 'Top Gun' were just nebulous "bad guys", flying fake MiGs (actually F-5 Tiger's), with no real commitment from the movie as to who they were. Not that it mattered, mind you. They could have been fighting the Empire from 'Star Wars' and it wouldn't have made any difference.

    Crusade I agree has way too much comedy ... yes I like it but prefer Raiders and Temple way more ... Temple is so underrated ... I feel Temple had horror elements in it and Raiders had to a lesser extent ... and both had some comedy in it but emphasised the action and suspense far more ... I guess Crusade was more of a reaction to those who wanted a much more family friendly Indy experience ... the horror elements are toned down greatly in Crusade and it is tame stuff compared to the first two albeit I still like it ...

    There's really only one truly great Indiana Jones movie and that's the first one. I think Temple of Doom is very good and I have fond memories of seeing it with my mum. I also liked the fact that it wasn't just a complete rehash of the first movie, which sequels often are. This is also where Last Crusade falls down for me. Dragging out the Germans again and going after another religious relic just felt like the producers had run out of ideas and were dipping back into the past movie to try and drag something up for the more limited audience member who just wanted to see Raiders again. Where Last Crusade is great, and I'm sure nearly everyone will agree on this, is in the dynamic between Jones and his father. But without that, it's a very poor film indeed. Take Connery out of the picture and the third Indy movie wouldn't be half as well received as it was/is.

    As for "horror elements", it's always been odd to me that people elevate Temple of Doom in that regard, when I consider Raiders to be far more given over to horrific imagery. Images that are flat out NSFW. Marion's bit with the dead rotting bodies in the Well of Souls is straight up terror and people's faces melt off their skulls in the end in an effect that wouldn't be out of place in any number of horror films. There's absolutely nothing that horrific in the second movie. There's actually more scary imagery in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' than there is in quite a few genuine horror movies that I've watched. But for some reason, Temple of Doom struck a chord, More than likely that chord was with parents who probably hadn't even seen the first film and they made enough noise get Spielberg and Lucas to reconsider their bent on the third instalment. And, as everyone knows, enough noise was made to get the MPAA to design the PG-13 rating. But it wasn't just 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom' that was a catalyst for that. 'Gremlins' was a PG movie as well and I think that caused more uproar. 'Ghostbusters', too, was a PG. Both movies were released a month after the Indy movie.

    One thing I will say about 'Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade' is that it's, in the most part, in keeping with the other movies in the original trilogy. Whereas, the ill conceived fourth movie and the latest entry feel like their foreign ripoffs. Hopefully, it's the last we see of Indiana Jones, because it's a series that should have begun and ended in the 1980's. That lightening in a bottle is never going to be reproduced ever again. Maybe the producers will get that reality this time due to it's relatively poor box office and just let Indy die.



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,082 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    "The more limited audience member"

    Well aren't you just fukin full of yourself.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,298 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH




  • Registered Users Posts: 123 ✭✭Tavrin Callas


    I have never seen a good Terry Gilliam film, and I've given him plenty of tries (well, five of them anyway).

    Other than Mulholland Drive I have never seen a good David Lynch film, and Inland Empire deserves a special mention for its utter awfulness.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 321 ✭✭RurtBeynolds


    The Last Crusade is the best Indie movie, and it's not even close.



Advertisement