List as many as you please. Share your opinions and explain why you think they were overhyped and/or overrated. Let loose :D

Its the box office champ and all but really the story wasnt that great. Bad dialog and holes in the plot. It was sad yeah and expensive to make but theres alot better movies out there than this. Why is it on top?
(Oh wait all those teenage girls and Leo Dicaprio,lol)

Pearl Harbor

I'd hvae to agree with jerejerebinks with Pearl Harbor.

Overbudget, way too long and really only any good when things are getting blown up.

Yeah--

The movie made me angry in a couple senses. I was let down, first and foremost, and then secondly I hated that skank that banged Hartnett and Afleck.

I've always thought that "It's a Wonderful life" is WAY overblown.
It's kinda a good story, but too long, convoluted, and fake.
The only good scene is when James Stewart runs down the street shouting. "Merry Christmas Everybody!".....
the rest of the movie is dull. And the talking planets at the beginning would be greeted with a howl of laughter from moviegoers today.
Why this is considered a classic is beyond me.:confused:

Once you get past the horrible romance story line the movie improves when the Japanese attack. I hate to say it but its true.

Originally posted by leela_zoid
Its the box office champ and all but really the story wasnt that great. Bad dialog and holes in the plot. It was sad yeah and expensive to make but theres alot better movies out there than this. Why is it on top?
(Oh wait all those teenage girls and Leo Dicaprio,lol)

I thought the whole movie sucked and half way through I wanted to personally drown each one of them to get their miserable lives over with! "IIIIIIIIIIIIIII'm the king of the world" could have been replaced by AssssssssssssssssssssssHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHole!"

I Have To Agree with pearl harbor i didnt even watch it the whole way through

Alright guys, lets hear your list rather then just bashing Crap Harbor.

Lord of the Rings, spider-man, ANY scorsese or kubrick film, Titanic, various Disney movies, Saving Private Ryan, alot of musicals, Field of Dreams, etc
There are plenty out there to voice your opinion on, let hear what they are and why!!

I thought the movie "The Natural" was WAYYY to overrated.

There's this one part where the guy playing the position that "Roy Hobbs" plays is the best player on the team. How do they manage to write off the character so "Hobbs" can play you ask? The kill him, of course. The old run into a wall and die, gag. Ruined the whole movie for me.





*Edit... Are you serious Evakian? Field of Dreams was a great movie, IMO. :)

There is a certain point where those touchy feely emotional "family" films cross the line, they disguise the lack of substance by getting you emotionally hooked. Its all a ploy to trick the audience, and many people buy into it.

anyway, guys lets keep hearing it!

Lord of the Rings, spider-man, ANY scorsese or kubrick film, Titanic, various Disney movies, Saving Private Ryan, alot of musicals, Field of Dreams, etc
Oh.... Them's fighting words.
Titanic, aye(first time I saw naked breasts though, a wee little lad in elementary school). Lord of the Rings, most certainly. I don't agree with you on Spider-Man, but that's not so upsetting as this:
"kubrick film"
NOOOO!!!!!
One of my favourite films EVER is Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb!
Clockwork Orange, Genius. Sparticus, marvelous. Full Metal Jacket, wonderful. 2001: A Space Odyssey... beautiful. You, sir, are nutty.

I will add Pulp Fiction to the list. That movie was just... moronic. Same thing with Reservoir Dogs. Never even bothered to watch Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill series... just so stupid...

2001 was sublime, Dr. Strangelove is one of my favorites, spartacus is a classic. (i may have liked them but this is overrated movies, not which are favorites, i believe they are heaped with too much praise)
The shining has its qualities but not too fabulous, Full Metal jacket was entertaining for 30 minutes, then it was all downhill.
Clockwork Orange was beyond garbage, several interesting scenes and well made, but just very poor overall.

Quentin Tarantino is very original but seduces with his style over substance approach. Pulp fiction, Kill bill, Reservoir dogs, and even his small part in Sin City all are well done, original pieces but i agree there is something about them that people hold in too high of esteem

Overblown movies of all time.

Without question, the very top, in my book was "Waterworld." Idiotic in the first degree. Don't get me started on it.

Let's see what else:

The entire Harry Potter series. Wooden acting supreme! The plot barely connected, more like you are given flashes of various scenes in the book. The worst one was Harry Potter 3. It's bad enough they left stuff out, but then the producer decided to put stuff IN. It's like going to a restaurant to get southern fried chicken. Except the chicken isn't fried, it's boiled, oh and the substituted chicken with cat!

"Pearl Harbor", I'd have to agree. The character weren't all that memorable.

"U-50whatever". Utterly forgettable.

"Lord of the Rings." One of the WORSE movies I ever bothered going to the theater to see. Basically, the movie featured dirty men running around with swords and women prancing to Enya music, and the damn movie lasted all day long!

"U-50whatever". Utterly forgettable

Well apparently you didn't forget about it :D

"Lord of the Rings." One of the WORSE movies I ever bothered going to the theater to see. Basically, the movie featured dirty men running around with swords and women prancing to Enya music, and the damn movie lasted all day long!

:eek: the LOTR series is three of some of the most well made, great adventures ever put on screen. Absolutely fantastic, i just think people give it too much credit and worship the films without ever reading the book or anything, plus other things in the category of films comes into play that cause it to be overblown.

Harry Potter---whats the big deal? The movie stinks and so does the books.

Waterworld. Didnt they make a big hype over it then it floundered at box office.

Originally posted by leela_zoid
Waterworld. Didnt they make a big hype over it then it floundered at box office.

The American critics crucified it... I loved it!

Harry Potter---whats the big deal? The movie stinks and so does the books.

agree...the first one wasn't bad, kind of a novelty...the second one I sat through 15 agonizing minutes hoping I would like it... never got further...

I agree Waterworld wasnt all bad. I enjoyed all Dennis Hopper scenes.

Harry Potter just cant stand.

Would the stinkin' Blair Witch project count? I know they didnt expect it to make a dime in the beginning ( and believe me- I can see why)...but then the movie became a huge blockbuster, and everyone was saying how terrifying it was.

The movie - quite simply could have been filmed better by a pot head film student at a community college with a cell phone.

Originally posted by leela_zoid
I agree Waterworld wasnt all bad. I enjoyed all Dennis Hopper scenes.

Harry Potter just cant stand.

Dennis Hopper is a freak but his stuff is always interesting and worth watching...

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
...but then the movie became a huge blockbuster, and everyone was saying how terrifying it was.

Because all those morons thought it was real. Idiots... I don't know how many people I had arguments with about the "reality" factor.

I actually did like the movie because of the way it was filmed and found it raised a few goose bumps...

Originally posted by ~Sal~
Because all those morons thought it was real. Idiots... I don't know how many people I had arguments with about the "reality" factor.

I actually did like the movie because of the way it was filmed and found it raised a few goose bumps...

It gave me motion sickness watching it....thats about the only reaction it got from me, other than extreme disgust in spending money to rent it.

Independence day .
Star Wars 1,2,3 (boring, boring, boring - not one single origional idea - and so kistch)
LOTR (entertaining but too long and terribly lacks of humor).
ET

Ind. Day was cheesy faire.
ET was as terrible as all get out.
Lotr did drag on for awhile, but it was necessary to get the plot across, as for humor, if LOTR was filed under comedy i would laugh at that in itself, it was not supposed to be a kneeslap fest.
Star Wars is always full of action and a well paced, well thought out plot, it is fueled by using elements of old hollywood but is full of its own fresh originality, plus i suppose the hour or so of intense explosive action spread out in each film is boring for you:confused:

If you enjoyed intense explosive action, i would have thought that independence day would have appealed to you evakian.

As for the others, Lotr is quality and star wars is only good in the new three mainly 2 and 3.

But then thats probably because im not a fan of the old school hollywood flicks where the greenscreening is so obvious its funny.

If you enjoyed intense explosive action, i would have thought that independence day would have appealed to you evakian.

1. Independence day sucked cow dix
2. I hate action movies

As for the others, Lotr is quality and star wars is only good in the new three mainly 2 and 3.

That is.....sacreligous!!! ;) If you hate old movies than you must have poor taste, especially if you hate the old star wars.

But then thats probably because im not a fan of the old school hollywood flicks where the greenscreening is so obvious its funny.

If you judge a film's quality off of its effects (especially if: no matter what time period), i will vomit on your grave.

wow, evak we have such different tastes im films but i take your point. And for the record i didnt say i hated all old films, more me taking a general dislike to the star wars franchise.

I usually am a fan of sci-fi stuff but that really wasn't that great - however thats just a personal opinion

Originally posted by Evakian

Lotr did drag on for awhile, but it was necessary to get the plot across, as for humor, if LOTR was filed under comedy i would laugh at that in itself, it was not supposed to be a kneeslap fest.

I agree but understand me well : the problem is not to turn it into a comedy, it's the total lack of distance. They are so 1st degree. It's so respectuous of tolkien's book it looks more like a devoted fan work than like a good adaptation.
For me, a good adapation does not need to be very close to the book, it should try first to be a good movie per se. LOTR misses that because it did not manage to get its own pace, its own feeling. I liked these movies, but IMO they are not "good movies".



Originally posted by Evakian
Star Wars is always full of action and a well paced, well thought out plot, it is fueled by using elements of old hollywood but is full of its own fresh originality, plus i suppose the hour or so of intense explosive action spread out in each film is boring for you:confused:
Star wars 1,2 and 3 lack one thing that is crucial for a movie : heroes. It's more like an historical documentary with action scenes. You never identify to any character, they are like puppets.
it's always predictable, there is not one good idea, not one surprise.
And action scenes are sometimes disctracting but with dollars anyone can do the same. Theydo not match SF movies like Matrix, Terminator i & II or even LOTR.

Another overated movie : Judge Dredd. Very disappointing when you know the great comic strip (one of my favourites). They totally missed the social and satyrical aspects. And the real Dredd never shows off his face !


http://www.chezcomics.com/comics-resources-information-pages/2000ad-prog-comic-information-resources/2000ad-comic-images/judge-dredd.gif

Originally posted by astrapol2
I agree but understand me well : the problem is not to turn it into a comedy, it's the total lack of distance. They are so 1st degree. It's so respectuous of tolkien's book it looks more like a devoted fan work than like a good adaptation.
For me, a good adapation does not need to be very close to the book, it should try first to be a good movie per se. LOTR misses that because it did not manage to get its own pace, its own feeling. I liked these movies, but IMO they are not "good movies".




Star wars 1,2 and 3 lack one thing that is crucial for a movie : heroes. It's more like an historical documentary with action scenes. You never identify to any character, they are like puppets.
it's always predictable, there is not one good idea, not one surprise.
And action scenes are sometimes disctracting but with dollars anyone can do the same. Theydo not match SF movies like Matrix, Terminator i & II or even LOTR.

Another overated movie : Judge Dredd. Very disappointing when you know the great comic strip (one of my favourites). They totally missed the social and satyrical aspects. And the real Dredd never shows off his face !


http://www.chezcomics.com/comics-resources-information-pages/2000ad-prog-comic-information-resources/2000ad-comic-images/judge-dredd.gif

Good points, i'm with you on that

I am only going to list classic movies I didn't enjoy, since that's the point.

I didn't like 2001. Not even after reading many articles and reviews on why it's good. It's too slow for me, many ideas that were supposed to be brilliant were not so interesting. The long space walk sequence can only be enjoyed for sentimental reasons today. The last 20 minutes was too confusing. Not even critics seem to agree on what it's supposed to be. The whole HAL fascination is dull compared to the ideas in the Matrix. The movie excels in presenting great ideas and filming executions, acting and plot was never a priority and I didn't like that. I saw the ideas and pondered, and had no more interst to watch it again. Whereas I would watch a movie with great acting or storyline over and over agian. Basically, I believe sci-fi movies age much less gracefully than other genres, and 2001 is one such example. I do like other Kubric movies.

I find Chinatown dull as well. I fell asleep in the middle of it. Is anyone a fan of this classic movie?

I find Alien and Aliens boring as well. However, Star Wars are great despite being Sci-Fi because Lucas created a world of interesting characters and rich stories, plus it's not about "ideas" but rather more of a straighforward action/romance saga.

I'll try to defend 2001 :
- first, you have to see it in a movie theater, not on TV (I don't know if it's your case). Most of its interest is in its fascinating visuals and music - and being slow is precisely what makes it a SF movie like no other.
- second, it's true, like many SF movies, it now appears a bit outadated. But in 1971 it was a trus shock - never special effects and realisation had been so bright in a SF movie.
In its vision of space, it's one of the only realistic SF movies, where the feeling of zero gravity (no up nor down), silence and slowness are expressed.

But that does not mean you have to love it, of course !

2001 makes more sense if you've read the book.

The opening sequence of 2001 (with the primative man-apes) is one of the greatest in movie history.

I never loved Citizen Kane. Many critics claim it to be the best movie ever but I just didn't get why.

I never loved Citizen Kane. Many critics claim it to be the best movie ever but I just didn't get why.

It experiments with various plot elements not seen up until its release, such as flashbacks. It also kept a intriguing mystery and had interesting characters.
But...the best movie ever? C'mon, i heartily disagree

Anyway, trying to find the "best movie ever" (or the best book, song, pizza…) is rather vain.