Most overated films

[Reno]

Right:

Lost in Translation: I didn't find it racist, but I did think it was overrated. Just a bit pointless for me - and I usually love Bill Murray; I even really like What About Bob?.

Shawshank - fucking amazing film and one of my most-watched. I disagree with the generalisation that it's for people who want to show that their tastes are wider than blah blah. Not true. I watch quite a wide range of cinema, and one of my favourite films is one that I have yet to find someone else on these boards who has seen it (Nang Nak) but I still love Shawshank.

I would have to say:

Shakespeare in cunting Love. Really the most patronising, irritating film ever released. I know a lot of people on these boards would agree, but it was highly rated at the time. Definitely the biggest offender.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind - really no better than an episode of the X Files

Bladerunner - this is a film I should love. Noirish/futuristic setting, Harrison Ford, etc, all the ingredients are right, yet somehow it doesn't add up, for me at any rate. I've always found it to be quite a hollow watching experience.

From Shawnshank to Blade Runner I disagree with almost every word you wrote, but just in regard of Close Encounters, that's of course the single film that inspired all of The X-Files most, so it's a bit glib turning that one on its head. What I miss about blockbusters now and something that I thought was great about Spielbergs 70's films is that they have so much invested in their characters. If you took the UFO's out of the film then it would still be a good drama about the breakdown of a marriage.

 

[Badgers]

These threads are always a good reminder that films are a form of art and people have different taste.

I brought Eyes Wide Shut (Kubrick) in to lend to a colleague. A daft Aussie lass opposite me mouthed off say 'that film is total shit and had no plot'

My response was to ask her if she liked Dirty Dancing to which she happy advised that she 'loved that film as it is timeless and has mass appeal'

I laughed mildly

 

[Dubversion]

I brought Eyes Wide Shut (Kubrick) in to lend to a colleague. A daft Aussie lass opposite me mouthed off say 'that film is total shit and had no plot'

well it WAS shit

 

[zoltan]

Yeah really want to see that again but can't find a download anywhere...

Ive got a "video cassette " of it in my house.

but no "video cassette" player unfort

 

[Jenerys]

yes, If was fucking excellent..

"blood on the quad, blood on the quad, me in the belltower and blood on the quad"

Now that's an overrated film if ever I've seen one!

 

[Badgers]

well it WAS shit

Reiterating my last post, films are a form of art and people have different taste

I thought EWS was a good film in many respects. It was brilliantly shot, raised a few interesting questions.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

From Shawnshank to Blade Runner I disagree with almost every word you wrote, but just in regard of Close Encounters, that's of course the single film that inspired all of The X-Files most, so it's a bit glib turning that one on its head. What I miss about blockbusters now and something that I thought was great about Spielbergs 70's films is that they have so much invested in their characters. If you took the UFO's out of the film then it would still be a good drama about the breakdown of a marriage.

Actually yeah maybe I was a bit harsh there...

 

[Dubversion]

raised a few interesting questions.

like, "jesus, how did he get a studio to put up the cash for THIS shit? "

 

[jbob]

These threads are always a good reminder that films are a form of art and people have different taste.

It'd be the shortest thread in history if that wasn't the case.

 

[Jenerys]

Oooh that's reminded me, The Passion - rather overrated I think

 

[Badgers]

like, "jesus, how did he get a studio to put up the cash for THIS shit? "

Personal taste
Personal taste
Personal taste
Personal taste
Personal taste
Personal taste

Did the studio lose money?

 

[Dubversion]

Personal taste
Personal taste
Personal taste
Personal taste
Personal taste
Personal taste

Did the studio lose money?

It was a gag
It was a gag
It was a gag
It was a gag
It was a gag

I don't know.

 

[Dubversion]

It'd be the shortest thread in history if that wasn't the case.

yes, we should all respect each others opinions and restrict ourselves to listing release dates.

 

[andy2002]

Love it or hate it, but Donnie Darko is really nothing like a David Lynch film, be it in style or in what it's trying to do. It's a lazy assessment that keeps getting repeated by critics for whom anything non-linear = weird = David Lynch.

Donnie Darko/David Lynch:
Small town life has dark underbelly with weird, scary characters.
Baffling, non-linear storyline with many interpretations.
Characters having disturbing visions/dreams and reality merging.
Eerie, off-kilter atmosphere.

And that's just off the top of my head, having seen DD only once a few years ago. Why do you think DD has so little in common with Lynch?

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Donnie Darko/David Lynch:
Small town life has dark underbelly with weird, scary characters.
Baffling, non-linear storyline with many interpretations.
Characters having disturbing visions/dreams and reality merging.
Eerie, off-kilter atmosphere.

And that's just off the top of my head, having seen DD only once a few years ago. Why do you think DD has so little in common with Lynch?

Really very different. Donnie Darko is more comparable to the great 80s teen films (and is clearly referencing them) with a dark edge.

 

[Dubversion]

yep, the DD / DL connection strikes me as really lazy

 

[Badgers]

It was a gag
It was a gag
It was a gag
It was a gag
It was a gag

I don't know.

Ok
Ok
Ok
Ok

Can you call them and ask

 

[andy2002]

yep, the DD / DL connection strikes me as really lazy

Only I've just stated why one reminds me of the other, so it's hardly like I've just lazily plucked the comparisons out of thin air.

 

[Dubversion]

well, ok. it SHOULD be a lazy comparison, you just found it trickier

 

[Reno]

Donnie Darko/David Lynch:
Small town life has dark underbelly with weird, scary characters.
Baffling, non-linear storyline with many interpretations.
Characters having disturbing visions/dreams and reality merging.
Eerie, off-kilter atmosphere.

And that's just off the top of my head, having seen DD only once a few years ago. Why do you think DD has so little in common with Lynch?

That's if you regard films as something where you just tick boxes instead of looking at what they are trying to do.

Unlike Lynch's Blue Velvet for instance, Donnie Darko isn't that interested in the dark side of a small town. Lynchs films deal with universal themes while Donnie Darko is about something specific. When people didn't seem to get what Donnie Darko was about Richard Kelly recut the film to make things more obvious (which turns out to be a sci-fi story about time travel and alternate universes and sacrifice) while Lynch is far from happy to supply explanations or assisting interpretations. The whole style of filmmaking is completely different. If anything Richard Kelly has more in common with Brian De Palma than with Lynch. The acting and dialogue in Donnie Darko is completely naturalistic, while in Lynchs films both are extremely stylised. Donnie Darko evokes a specific time and place and there is an intentional tension between what is naturalistic and what fantastic, while in Lynch's films take place in a non-specific dream world set between somewhere the 1950's and now and where everything is completely off kilter.

 

[Stigmata]

Im sorry, but you are SO wrong - CO = OK, but M McD was fantastic during the period

OK U R RITE

 

[andy2002]

That's if you regard films as something where you just tick boxes instead of looking at what they are trying to do.

Unlike Lynch's Blue Velvet for instance, Donnie Darko isn't that interested in the dark side of a small town. Lynchs films deal with universal themes while Donnie Darko is about something specific. When people didn't seem to get what Donnie Darko was about Richard Kelly recut the film to make things more obvious (which turns out to be a sci-fi story about time travel and alternate universes and sacrifice) while Lynch is far from happy to supply explanations or assisting interpretations. The whole style of filmmaking is completely different. If anything Richard Kelly has more in common with Brian De Palma than with Lynch. The acting and dialogue in Donnie Darko is completely naturalistic, while in Lynchs films both are extremely stylised. Donnie Darko evokes a specific time and place and there is an intentional tension between what is naturalistic and what fantastic, while in Lynch's films take place in a non-specific dream world set between somewhere the 1950's and now and where everything is completely off kilter.

I really enjoyed reading that – you clearly know your stuff. Thing is, just because you've listed all the ways in which Donnie Darko isn't like a David Lynch movie doesn't mean there aren't ways in which it is – or at least why it so easily reminds people of one. I'm not suggesting Kelly is a Lynch copyist either but I just don't see how the comparison (made by innumerable critics and film fans) can be dismissed as merely "lazy".