or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Most overrated movie/actor.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Most overrated movie/actor. - Page 8

post #106 of 203
500 Dong is less than 4 cents with todays exchange rate...

Thats a little steep for me M@t, plus you could probably buy a suit for that or something. So do me a favor and keep your Dong to yourself.
post #107 of 203
Brad Pitt
post #108 of 203
Glad to see some love being shown for LIT in the face of the haters. I haven't really looked at it from TS's perspective, I just think it's a beautiful dream of a movie, I love the dialogue, the humor and the sublime surrealistic nature of how it's shot. Completely agree with Newton - came out of that movie loving life. BTW Odoreater, Squid and the Whale was one of the best pictures I've ever seen. Sorry if you don't like movies that don't have gajillion dollar budgets, but I guarantee you 99.99% of people who like that movie don't like it because "it's different." Your statements wreak of ignorance. I don't even want to dignify your drivel with an explanation on why the movie is fantastic.
post #109 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by odoreater
By the way, I though Lost in Translation was horrible.

I realize I run the risk of being taken to task in a footnote in Tokyo Slim's thesis, but I am afraid to say that I agree with Odereater. I saw Lost in Translation in a small artsy theater in Shibuya and thought it was very dull. I couldn't see much complexity there. It didn't work for me on any level. My Japanese companion,who will watch pretty much anything, fell asleep half way through. When I woke her after the credits had rolled, she didn't ask how it had turned out.

If this thread is about a film or actor that I think is rated more highly than is warranted, then Lost in Translation is on my list.

Bic
post #110 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim
Its a movie that works on so many different levels though, just because you choose to ignore, can't understand, or aren't aware of the underlying social context, doesn't mean that the movie is uncommunicative. It just means that you aren't receptive, ignorant, or incapable of understanding its subtleties.

I could, and probably will someday, write a dissertation on the multiple cultural veiwpoints espoused in the movie. I find it amazing, and if it was intentional or accidental makes very little difference, the effect is the same. Both cultures involved can watch this movie and come away with completely seperate ideas about what they just watched.

For example, from the more traditionalist Japanese perspective, Bill Murray's character can be the the focal point, and portrays a boorish, racist, American tourist, who at every turn mocks and disrespects his hosts, and tries to weasel out of every business obligation and promise he's made. His cavalier personal attitudes and disinclination to take anything seriously is a typical stereotype of Americans. Not only that, its a greater reflection of his life, failed marriage, poor decisionmaking, lack of personal control, and downward spiraling career, and only in such an alien setting can he realize that he has actually been the villian. Basically he is a mess, and not the sympathetic character that you see when you view the movie through western eyes. You can see that through his relationship with Scarlet Johansson's character, assisting in her coming of age, and discovery of different cultures and herself, he is trying to redeem himself through the mutual journey of undertanding and acceptance of situations out of their control.

This is completely different than what many people with more western ideals get from this movie, but it works just as well. It works this way because the movie is almost perfectly written, filmed, and edited. It allows the viewers personal biases and experiences to flavor the characters, instead of having your head beaten in by traditional story archetypes. Its trancendental cultural realism. It may not be your cup of tea, but its greatness as film is IMO, undeniable.

Not only that, its a beautiful movie.

If I don't appreciate this movie it definately isn't from ignorance. I just don't feel/draw the same sublime energy that some of you seem to from this film. If you take even a cursory glance at what I find aesthetically pleasing, you'll see what music I like is especially atypical, and I don't like most of the movies I see. Granted a lot of my favourites are from Hollywood, but I don't think that just because I'm not in complete ecstasy over Lost In Translation automatically means I'm camping outside the theatre for the next Wesley Snipes movie or whatever other idiot is about to release a flick with explosions and car chases.

A lot of the reason I dislike this movie is because I don't like Scarlett Johansson. In every film I've ever seen her in, I cannot stand how she delivers lines, I don't like her sexy pseudo anchor woman voice, and often, if I find myself hating an actor/actrice, it sullies the rest of the movie for me because I cannot personally connect with what is going on screen. Maybe why I hated Lost in Translation is a matter of projection... being in a cynical time of your life in a transient milieu can be offputting if it's shoved in film form into your face. I saw this when I was living at home during my first summer of university, and I hated being back so maybe it is afterall, a freudian defence mechanism. This is probably one of the films I've had the strongest reaction against. I'm finding it difficult separating those people who actually get this film and therefore appreciate it, and the many, many people who read on some blog what they think it means and therefore accept it as their favourite movie to impress some other film sophist. I think that this film is definately one of those, and that is another reason I have such a problem with it.

As someone who one day aspires to make films, I'm interested in what affects people. If this is it for you, then great and I'll even try to understand why. I'm just saying that you can't always expect other people to feel so strongly in the same direction as you on such a polarizing creation.
post #111 of 203
I recently saw Swingers and Waiting for Guffman and thought that they were both overrated.
post #112 of 203
Swingers is a terrific film and captured a very specific period of time.

I think Benicio Del Toro is overrated.

I think Shawshank Redemption is overrated.
post #113 of 203
I have never cared for Renee Zellwenger.

To this day, I still don't understand all the hype about Sean Connery.
post #114 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by countdemoney
Swingers is a terrific film and captured a very specific period of time.

I agree. If you see Swingers now it seems like "what's the big deal", but having been a part of that late 90s "Derby swing/rockabilly scene" that the movie showcases, it was a big deal for a lot of folks and (along with the Gap commercial from that year) was a catalyst for shitload of folks getting into swing dancing.
post #115 of 203
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by countdemoney
Swingers is a terrific film and captured a very specific period of time.

I think Benicio Del Toro is overrated.

I think Shawshank Redemption is overrated.

Swingers was my favourite film for years until recently when I watched it again.Although I still enjoyed it,I couldn't remember why I loved it so much,which proves your point.
However I love Benecio Del Toro and Shawshank.
post #116 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by odoreater
By the way, I though Lost in Translation was horrible. Movies like Lost in Translation or the Squid and the Whale are the most overrated. Just because it's different doesn't mean that it's good. Both of those movies were a huge waste of time. That's what I see a lot of you latching on to. People want to show how sophisticated they are because they like things that aren't mainstream - but, just because something isn't mainstream doesn't mean that it's good and just because something is mainstream, doesn't mean that it's bad.

I think generally, movies centering around the "human condition" (for lack of a better term) are always going to have their fair share of promoters and detracters. In addition to Lost in Translation (which I saw) and The Squid and the Whale (which I haven't seen), I'd put Garden State (which I hated), American Beauty (which I liked), and Grand Canyon (which I'm on the fence about) in this category. You generally get one set of people talking about how brilliantly insightful the movie is, juxtaposed with a second group who find it any one of simplistic, whiny, unrealistic, or just bad (bad acting, bad directing, bad writing, etc.). One exception that jumps out at me is The Big Chill, which everyone seems to have liked (at least everyone I've spoken with about it).

Another exception (and this is very general) occurs when these types of movies get put together as a genre picture. For example, Mystic River is a human condition picture, but it's also a very good detective story/mystery. Unforgiven is also a human condition picture, but it is a western. Fight Club doesn't have a real genre, but lots of guys get beat up and stuff, so its got that going for it.

I'm sure any one of you can name a dozen or more exceptions to what I've written above, and there is no doubt that the above is an extreme generalization. However, this is just what I've noticed in viewing these movies and listening to and reading others' opinions regarding them.
post #117 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBZ
I think generally, movies centering around the "human condition" (for lack of a better term) are always going to have their fair share of promoters and detracters.

Just out of curiosity, do you think that these movies - and their acceptance - hinge on the viewer's state of mind and current life conditions? Some themes and situations seem to hit home for various people at various times, and a movie that was cherished years ago might fall flat today for some of us.

On to another topic, I saw Castaway for the first time last night. I don't get it. I get the premise, but...cast stones if you must...It wasn't working for me.
post #118 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBZ
I think generally, movies centering around the "human condition" (for lack of a better term) are always going to have their fair share of promoters and detracters. In addition to Lost in Translation (which I saw) and The Squid and the Whale (which I haven't seen), I'd put Garden State (which I hated), American Beauty (which I liked), and Grand Canyon (which I'm on the fence about) in this category. You generally get one set of people talking about how brilliantly insightful the movie is, juxtaposed with a second group who find it any one of simplistic, whiny, unrealistic, or just bad (bad acting, bad directing, bad writing, etc.). One exception that jumps out at me is The Big Chill, which everyone seems to have liked (at least everyone I've spoken with about it).

Another exception (and this is very general) occurs when these types of movies get put together as a genre picture. For example, Mystic River is a human condition picture, but it's also a very good detective story/mystery. Unforgiven is also a human condition picture, but it is a western. Fight Club doesn't have a real genre, but lots of guys get beat up and stuff, so its got that going for it.

I'm sure any one of you can name a dozen or more exceptions to what I've written above, and there is no doubt that the above is an extreme generalization. However, this is just what I've noticed in viewing these movies and listening to and reading others' opinions regarding them.

Good post. I also hated Garden State.
post #119 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas
Just out of curiosity, do you think that these movies - and their acceptance - hinge on the viewer's state of mind and current life conditions? Some themes and situations seem to hit home for various people at various times, and a movie that was cherished years ago might fall flat today for some of us.

Oh, absolutely. There is no doubt in my mind that a person's age and condition go a long way in determining how they will interpret a film, a book, etc. Garden State is a great example. I can definitely see it appealing to someone who is still in college or who has recently graduated. I'm a little older than that, so I had more difficulty relating. Beyond this, however, I didn't think it was a very good movie. I can appreciate the fact that a film cannot speak to everyone's condition, and I'm not so self-centered that I can't appreciate something even if I'm not able to relate to it. However, I'm not a big Zach Braff fan. He seems like kind of a weenie (although I've always liked him on Scrubs). I'm also sick of movies that have quirky characters in them just for the sake of being quirky (like Natalie Portman's character - she rides around with a helmet on her head and has a gerbil cemetary in her back yard - she's quirky, so she must be important/deep). I'm also sick of movies/television shows that use soundtracks (no matter how good they might be) to try and tell me how to feel. To me, this is different from The Big Chill, which used music as a backdrop rather than to dictate emotions. A lot of television shows are guilty of doing this. It was kind of cool and innovative when Homicide started doing it. Now, it's just annoying.

I also think there are other movies, such as Unforgiven, which raise interesting questions and themes even if most of us can't really relate to the characters or their situations. For example, Unforgiven, in my mind, raised the following questions (among others): what is justice? are violent men born violent, or do they choose to be violent? can a violent person ever escape his past? are there ramifications to violent acts to the perpetrator beyond those which may be imposed by society? why is it necessary to celebrate violent acts in literature and other media? why is it necessary to alter a violent person's history or actions in literature and other media in order to turn them into "heroes"? I find these questions very interesting, even though I couldn't really relate to any of the characters in the film on a personal level.

Okay, I've rambled enough.
post #120 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBZ
Oh, absolutely. There is no doubt in my mind that a person's age and condition go a long way in determining how they will interpret a film, a book, etc. Garden State is a great example. I can definitely see it appealing to someone who is still in college or who has recently graduated. I'm a little older than that, so I had more difficulty relating. Beyond this, however, I didn't think it was a very good movie. I can appreciate the fact that a film cannot speak to everyone's condition, and I'm not so self-centered that I can't appreciate something even if I'm not able to relate to it. However, I'm not a big Zach Braff fan. He seems like kind of a weenie (although I've always liked him on Scrubs). I'm also sick of movies that have quirky characters in them just for the sake of being quirky (like Natalie Portman's character - she rides around with a helmet on her head and has a gerbil cemetary in her back yard - she's quirky, so she must be important/deep). I'm also sick of movies/television shows that use soundtracks (no matter how good they might be) to try and tell me how to feel. To me, this is different from The Big Chill, which used music as a backdrop rather than to dictate emotions. A lot of television shows are guilty of doing this. It was kind of cool and innovative when Homicide started doing it. Now, it's just annoying.

I also think there are other movies, such as Unforgiven, which raise interesting questions and themes even if most of us can't really relate to the characters or their situations. For example, Unforgiven, in my mind, raised the following questions (among others): what is justice? are violent men born violent, or do they choose to be violent? can a violent person ever escape his past? are there ramifications to violent acts to the perpetrator beyond those which may be imposed by society? why is it necessary to celebrate violent acts in literature and other media? why is it necessary to alter a violent person's history or actions in literature and other media in order to turn them into "heroes"? I find these questions very interesting, even though I couldn't really relate to any of the characters in the film on a personal level.

Okay, I've rambled enough.

I've heard about Unforgiven for years, even from my sister, who is indifferent to movies as a medium in general, and who certainly has no love for 'guy' movies, least of all Westerns. Time to cue that sucker up in Netflix. Though whenever I finally get around to seeing films I've heard about for years, I'm always disappointed, 'Citizen Kane' being the primary offender.

Overrated: Citizen Kane.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Most overrated movie/actor.