This is the internet. This is what happens on the internet. It’s okay. No one’s going to change anything. We can only say our opinion because maybe we don’t want to hold it in any longer, and all of our friends don’t give two shits about certain things the same way some people on a forum might. That is why there is so much venting. And you are doing the same thing with this thread. You would have made a much better point of your argument if you hadn’t posted anything at all.
I stand corrected. There are some interested books on amazon about telepathic communication, I’ll look into it.
Great films make up 1% – the other 9% are the films we like, but no one else would consider great. All the rest is the stuff (substitute ‘crap’) we don’t talk about. I agree completely with your premise – there are far too many threads where we (collectively) vent our personal tirades against certain directors or films. I think it is much more constructive to talk – in as much detail as won’t bore everyone to death – about why we like a film or director. Thanks for bringing up the pointlessness of talking about overrated/underrated when perhaps we should be talking about unrecognized films/directors who need more exposure here. Let’s stop venting, listing, tirading, and get down to discussing what films we like and why.
“If everyone enjoyed the same films that you enjoyed, the world would be a much more boring place. Then how would you feel superior to them by listing all the obscure films and directors you know?” Couldn’t agree with you more, Richard.
I can tell you what’s not overrated: a good sandwich!
Discussing whether directors or films are overrated isn’t necessarily out of the question. But it does seem to spark a lot of predictably unsupported argumentation (as opposed to logically supported arguments). I’m starting to think it’s really just best to just keep out of the discussion if it appears to be devolving into entropy, in-fighting, back-stabbing, homophobic slurs, etc. It is the fate of every thread and merely a matter of time. People are here to fight, never forget that. Fight and be belittle others’ ideas because, I don’t know, they don’t exercise enough opportunity to do it in their real lives. Beats me, but it’s certainly a little weird.
Now, in an effort to remain proactive: Jancsó! Jancsó! Jancsó! Let’s talk about him. Don’t see his stuff come up much on threads, and I think he’s exhibited some of the greatest technical mastery of the medium in its entire history. His highly mobile long-takes are unlike anything else in movies! Right?
@JP
There’s really nothing like it, is there? All too often, I forget. Then I have one again, and I’m like, “Man, that was good! Why don’t I eat these all the time?” So simple…
This thread is overrated.
Usually when a film or director (book, painting, architect, what-have-you) is deemed overrated it is because of your exact reasoning. That figure is needlessly soaking up the discussion. I suspect your post was apropos my forum topic on Howard Hawks being overrated. Had you read it, you would have seen that my complaint was that praise for, in my opinion, overrated directors like Hawks serves as a detriment to directors I feel merit more attention (such as my example of Robert Siodmak (a number of whose important films (i.e. Phantom Lady) have yet to be made available on DVD and therefore are unaccessible for judgement and discussion by a wide audience).
The oldest topic of criticism (and really, the essence of any discussion) is the question of “Better than? Worse than? Equal to?” All art criticism springs from that.
My argument was that Howard Hawks was less of a director than many of his contemporaries. A fair topic for discussion. But I’m also curious—what personal issues was I venting? How can I feel sour grapes towards Howard Hawks?
If only we could be as enlightened as you and not have tastes.
and BEVERLY HILLS CHIHUAHUA exists because talking dog movies make money. not cosmic artistic balance.
and, finally, I would truly envy any person who, when they need to vent, needs to vent about bad movies, truly a sign of comfortable living.
chicken salad?
Richard: I think we should give up the fight. Everyone here would much rather vent, score points, belittle, poke fun, than discuss. I will take my marbles and go home now. Too bad the thumbs up/down option has ceased – though I was originally no fan of it. (I could now get about 20 thumbs downs for just saying all this). Vent on eterni.
RUS: Threads where we discuss the merits/demerits of a particular director are perfectly valid, but beware the ‘over’-use of the term ‘over’-rated. It is a term we all can use too often here, like "pretentious.’ Your points are valid, because at least you are throwing out a topic for discussio, not just aimlessly sniping at others. I know others will say that sniping is ‘fun’, but so is throwing snowballs at unsuspecting people when you are about 10.
@Soybean
Had a great chicken salad sandwich last week. But ham and swiss will do just fine typically.
@skeleton
Well it wasn’t based on your post because I’m not familiar enough with Howard Hawkes to know whether or not he is overrated. It was based on the general tendency of film forums to make posts about how overrated a director or film is. It was also intended to be lighthearted enough that it wouldn’t offend anyone, but its difficult to not offend anyone on a forum that has very highly opinionated people. I figured if I made a somewhat jokey post about all the “Overrated” posts, then I would get some interesting answers and I have already, so thanks for those that responded.
I do have tastes, its just that my tastes include dealing with any given film within the context that it appears to me. I have a difficult time making a master list of great films or great film directors because I think they are each unique personalities or creations that seek to achieve different aims. Thats the “cosmic balance” perspective, if a film’s main purpose is to make money then why try to rank it with a film that is a highly personal and finely crafted vision? They are not even really in the same category. They can coexist, but separately. And rather than saying a highly regarded film or director sucks, better to say why he or she sucks and then move on to something that’s underrated and doesn’t suck. I understand that its a game where people enjoy being iconoclasts, but I always thought it was better to build a case for a new contender then to find ways to tear down an old one.
@Richard
Canonization is a natural instinct and one which I feel is necessary to art criticism.
Regardless of the intentions of a film’s creation, they should all be judged on the same plane (the Marx Brothers never made comedies for the same reasons Bunuel or Sturges did, but they should be judged equally (all three are excellent, in my opinion). Remember your Samuel Johnson: “No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money.”
Overrated posts are part of the fun of posting. If I want to have a good discussion about movies, I’ll sit down with my friends and have an actual discussion. The format of web forums works against in-depth, detailed discussions. They’re just a good way to relax your mind for twenty minutes. No man but a blockhead ever showed up to a forum looking for conversation.
So long live lists, bitching, and putting off grading papers.
(and, by the way, making money IS a finely crafted vision)
I just hope there are enough seats at the Algonquin Round Table for all of us. We’re such a fascinating lot.
Shotzi: We’ll be there with Monty Wooley in The Man Who Came to Dinner as subs for the real Alexander Woolcott. Harpo (read his autobiography: Harpo Speaks) also frequented the Algonquin Table. Dorothy Parker was there, too. Yes, I think we would all fit in.
I think I might be somewhat idealistic about what a forum can potentially be, despite what it usually devolves into despite the best of efforts by a lot of the members. I don’t really have anything against canonization or iconoclasm per se, I just don’t like it when its done out of meanness or as some kind of ego boost. I think most films and directors deserve praise and criticism as long as they are well thought out and seek to advance a point rather than just serve as a medium for emotional outbursts. Also, I think this forum exists because not everyone has friends who have the same tastes in film as they do, so at times a real thoughtful conversation is not possible. A forum is certainly not a complete substitute for that kind of a relationship, but it can still serve as a place for a thoughtful exchange of ideas.
I think it’s always good to re-examine the canon and canonical: discussions about relative “greatness” are important because they help us figure out exactly what we value in cinema.
That said I suspect that the concept of “overrated” ends up obfuscating these conversations because the obvious reply is “Overrated by whom?” One could (for example) make the case that Howard Hawks is overrated by auteurist film buffs (I don’t think he is – he’s my favorite filmmaker), but that he’s underrated by more general film buffs/critics (who don’t take him as seriously as Welles, Renoir, Kurosawa, etc.).
It must be lunchtime. because all this talk of sandwiches has got my stomach doing cartwheels in my belly…
But back on topic: discussing whether or not a film is overrated/underrated can be fun/therapeutic/a reason to start fights (oh wait, I already said “fun”)/the jump-off of intelligent conversation. But there is NO NEED to have a million of those threads. I think if we find a film is getting too much attention or not enough, we should discuss that in the specific threads for that movie rather than create a dozen more.
I’m all for overrated/underrated discussion. But I’m against having these boards overly saturated with them. I swear, if I see one more “Dark Knight” thread…
calling posts on overrated movies and directors overrated is overrated
I agree, overrated discussions are overrated. However, underrating is very overrated as well. We just cant win.
I’m familiar with those that spent time at the Round Table, Bob; that is why I made the sarcastic comment.
Pretentious, yes. Overrated, no.
I just had a great turkey reuben and it was way better than any fucking Nancy Meyer movie.
And yes overrated lists are overrated. I guess for most human beings it’s just easier to explain why they hate something rather than why they love it.
I had considered posting a similar thread Richard. Thanks for bringing it up.
Terms like overrated and underrated are frustratingly vague, and can be applied to anything.
Without putting them into context, they are meaningless.
uh… i thought movies were bad/good/great only through opinion? i didnt know some movies by fact are good or bad. i mustve been living under a rock.
uh… i thought movies were bad/good/great only through opinion? i didnt know some movies by fact are good or bad. i mustve been living under a rock.
“I do have tastes, its just that my tastes include dealing with any given film within the context that it appears to me.” I generally agree with this. It may sound ridiculous, but I seem to find myself happier when I think this way. That’s just me, and I am glad others give it deeper thought. However, recently, I’ve been realizing I do not have the verbal or intellectual skills, at least in the topic of film, to give detailed analysis on why I enjoyed or did not enjoy something. I am more focused on simply how I ‘felt’ while watching a film. There is my non-relevant response.
Stupid thread.
This post is overrated.
Richard
What’s the point of posting about how overrated a film or director is? It seems like a way to vent personal issues with the acclaim that that film or director has received. I think its unfortunate that some lesser known films and directors will never be recognized because they have to constantly live in the shadow of others, but it seems that a lot of the opinions here are more sour grapes than anything else. If everyone enjoyed the same films that you enjoyed, the world would be a much more boring place. Then how would you feel superior to them by listing all the obscure films and directors you know? I praise films like Beverly Hills Chihuahua because the bad must exist in order for the good to also exist. The fact that truly great films make up like less than 10% of all films produced (I made that up), makes them that much better.