Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Overrated films.

13»

Comments

  • What didn't anyone get about The Shawshank Redemption? Pretty simple story.
  • The Shawshank Redemption... Great movie, but the best movie of all time? Not sure.

    I think there's several films i'd put on the top shelf alongside it, if not above it.
  • One of the reviews in the TV ad for The Post was, 'Probably the best film ever made.' What a stupid, empty statement. Maybe it's some critic or publication desperate to get their name on ads and posters. But it doesn't even make sense. It's like damning with faint praise. 'Probably' the best film ever made; there's a suggested 'but' there. Even if this person could be a bit more decisive and claim it was DEFINITELY the best film ever made, then that would also be a worthless statement. Of all the films ever made, in the history of cinema, in all the many different genres and sub-genres, this one is the absolute best, is it? But the fact that the reviewer thought it was only 'probably' the best film ever made...

    I haven't seen it, mind.
  • hawksmoor said:

    One of the reviews in the TV ad for The Post was, 'Probably the best film ever made.' What a stupid, empty statement. Maybe it's some critic or publication desperate to get their name on ads and posters. But it doesn't even make sense. It's like damning with faint praise. 'Probably' the best film ever made; there's a suggested 'but' there. Even if this person could be a bit more decisive and claim it was DEFINITELY the best film ever made, then that would also be a worthless statement. Of all the films ever made, in the history of cinema, in all the many different genres and sub-genres, this one is the absolute best, is it? But the fact that the reviewer thought it was only 'probably' the best film ever made...

    I haven't seen it, mind.

    It’s a pretty average film .
  • Usual suspects
    Shawshank redemption both aimless drivel only critically acclaimed cos nobody wants to admit they don’t get it There’s nothing to get neither makes any sense 2 hours of life you won’t get back
    Empire Strikes Back = 10 minutes of plot plus 2 hours of filler

    You may want to have a long hard look at yourself
  • Dunkirk

    Didn't like it, but tempted to see it again in case I was missing something.
    Good film but did not live up to the hype. I watch, and collect World War 2 films but this one will not have a place in my collection.
  • Fumbluff said:

    Artificial Intelligence and fucking Vanilla Sky

    Normally really enjoyed Cameron Crowe’s movies but what the hell was he thinking with Vanilla Sky. 2001: Space Odyssey and Being John Malkovich, make you wonder what the critics are smoking.

    Fumbluff said:

    Artificial Intelligence and fucking Vanilla Sky

    Normally really enjoyed Cameron Crowe’s movies but what the hell was he thinking with Vanilla Sky. 2001: Space Odyssey and Being John Malkovich, make you wonder what the critics are smoking.
    agree with 2001. its supposed to be a sci fi classic and im the biggest geek going but I think wtf is this
    2001 is the closest cinema has come to fine art. It’s a masterpiece whether you find it entertaining or not, especially for the techniques etc in the physical filmmaking process. Remember most sci fi films before 2001 were with men in tights and blokes in tin foil costumes pretending to be robots.
  • Citizen Kane
    Fight Club
    North by northwest
    Eternal Sunshine of the spotless Mind
    The Shape of Water
    Sister Act
    All the Star Wars films apart from the first.

    North by Northwest is great. You were about to lose a lot of respect I have for you options on films, but then you redeemed yourself with Eternal Sunshine, which I completely agree with.

    I spent the whole film hoping he managed to succeed in forgetting the irritating self-centred, bratty Kate Winslet character, which I suspect was the exact opposite of what they were aiming for.
  • hawksmoor said:

    One of the reviews in the TV ad for The Post was, 'Probably the best film ever made.' What a stupid, empty statement. Maybe it's some critic or publication desperate to get their name on ads and posters. But it doesn't even make sense. It's like damning with faint praise. 'Probably' the best film ever made; there's a suggested 'but' there. Even if this person could be a bit more decisive and claim it was DEFINITELY the best film ever made, then that would also be a worthless statement. Of all the films ever made, in the history of cinema, in all the many different genres and sub-genres, this one is the absolute best, is it? But the fact that the reviewer thought it was only 'probably' the best film ever made...

    I haven't seen it, mind.

    It’s a pretty average film .
    Now see, that would've been a much more honest statement on the advert:

    Deep-toned, over-serious male voice-over: 'The Post, a pretty average film. In cinemas from Thursday.'
  • And yeah, Tim burton is a fraud. My boss used to work at a high end soho vfx house and said the only Hollywood director/Star he ever went into a meeting and had a lower opinion of coming out was Tim burton, the guy had zero ideas and his art director was the one with all the talent.
  • Sponsored links:


  • A friend of mine is a film compositor and he's constantly bemoaning the laziness of certain directors. He worked on a Ridley Scott film, and he said there was a huge sequence with multiple camera set-ups and Scott just left cameras in shot because he knew the compositors would remove them.

    It's like the job of cinematographer. It's no longer someone like Jack Cardiff sorting out the lighting and filters and how the camera will move in a certain way in the desert on a dolly, it's someone filming an actor against a green screen that will be filled up later by the f/x guys, then he gets the compositors to adjust the light and shade and colour pallete at another stage.
  • The Player - Another film with the tagline "Probably the best film ever made" although this was of course tongue in cheek as the film was a "hilarious" satire on the industry. Still a crap film though. Robert Altman made some crap.
  • hawksmoor said:

    A friend of mine is a film compositor and he's constantly bemoaning the laziness of certain directors. He worked on a Ridley Scott film, and he said there was a huge sequence with multiple camera set-ups and Scott just left cameras in shot because he knew the compositors would remove them.

    It's like the job of cinematographer. It's no longer someone like Jack Cardiff sorting out the lighting and filters and how the camera will move in a certain way in the desert on a dolly, it's someone filming an actor against a green screen that will be filled up later by the f/x guys, then he gets the compositors to adjust the light and shade and colour pallete at another stage.

    Ridley Scott hasn’t made a good film in years. A great art director but not much else going for him in the storytelling department.

    You bemoan the dying art of the cinematographer, but compositing and CG is an art within itself that’s cruelly overlooked (to the detriment of the artists who usually are forced to work illegal hours).
  • Riviera said:

    The Player - Another film with the tagline "Probably the best film ever made" although this was of course tongue in cheek as the film was a "hilarious" satire on the industry. Still a crap film though. Robert Altman made some crap.

    And with everyone talking at the same time.
  • Best film ever is One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest!
  • hawksmoor said:

    A friend of mine is a film compositor and he's constantly bemoaning the laziness of certain directors. He worked on a Ridley Scott film, and he said there was a huge sequence with multiple camera set-ups and Scott just left cameras in shot because he knew the compositors would remove them.

    It's like the job of cinematographer. It's no longer someone like Jack Cardiff sorting out the lighting and filters and how the camera will move in a certain way in the desert on a dolly, it's someone filming an actor against a green screen that will be filled up later by the f/x guys, then he gets the compositors to adjust the light and shade and colour pallete at another stage.

    Ridley Scott hasn’t made a good film in years. A great art director but not much else going for him in the storytelling department.

    You bemoan the dying art of the cinematographer, but compositing and CG is an art within itself that’s cruelly overlooked (to the detriment of the artists who usually are forced to work illegal hours).
    I absolutely recognise the importance and the artful nature of the work that compositors and the CGI guys do. Talking of green screen... there was a clip from Ugly Betty going round where the title character fell down some steps and crashed into a bus stop. Except the actress was not at any of those locations. The whole short sequence was all green screen. And that's 'just' for a TV show.
  • I understand the use of green screen for certain genres and applications, but for a TV show shot in a particular city, I just assumed the scenes would be filmed in those locations.
  • hawksmoor said:

    I understand the use of green screen for certain genres and applications, but for a TV show shot in a particular city, I just assumed the scenes would be filmed in those locations.

    A lot of CG in films is now unnoticed, I remember there being a lot of cg in the wolf of Wall Street that you never really notice at all.
  • hawksmoor said:

    I understand the use of green screen for certain genres and applications, but for a TV show shot in a particular city, I just assumed the scenes would be filmed in those locations.

    It's very expensive to get permits to shoot in come cities (Manhattan for example).....I read somewhere a few years back that Vancouver was being used as a replacement for Manhattan in film shoots because it was so much cheaper.
  • hawksmoor said:

    I understand the use of green screen for certain genres and applications, but for a TV show shot in a particular city, I just assumed the scenes would be filmed in those locations.

    It's very expensive to get permits to shoot in come cities (Manhattan for example).....I read somewhere a few years back that Vancouver was being used as a replacement for Manhattan in film shoots because it was so much cheaper.
    Vancouver, Singapore, Bangalore and London are the post production capitals of the world cos of the tax concessions.

    Iirc Atlanta is used for shoots a lot these days and pinewood have opened up studios there.
  • Sponsored links:


  • I went to see the new Dunkirk film (my Dad was a Dunkirk veteran), but realised that the original film with John Mills was much better, so went and bought it.
  • Blair witch project. Scariest thing about it was that I paid to see it.
  • Forest Gump

    No
  • SDAddick said:



    Million Dollar Baby

    the dictionary definition of an overrated film. a truly awful, dull movie yet won the best picture oscar
  • Harry Potter
    Lord Of The Rings
  • McBobbin said:

    bobmunro said:

    Talal said:

    Sure this was done recently... Anyway I said The Godfather then and I'll say it again now.

    Blasphemer!

    The Godfather is easily the greatest film ever made.
    Nah. In the words of Peter Griffin "it insists on itself".

    Blazing Saddles is the greatest film ever made.
    Blazing Saddles
    Stir Crazy
    Hear No Evil, See No Evil

    All brilliant films
  • Dazzler21 said:

    The Shawshank Redemption... Great movie, but the best movie of all time? Not sure.

    I think there's several films i'd put on the top shelf alongside it, if not above it.

    It's certainly not the greatest movie of all time, which is why, in my opinion, it is overrated.
  • Best film ever is One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest!

    Good shout. And the book is great too.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!