Are we overrating movies? (1 Viewer)

[BillBobs]

Random thoughts on the issue, because I'm too lazy to shape them into something coherent...
- I feel vaguely uncomfortable sometimes throwing around the words "underrated" and "overrated". It suggests that there is a magic "just right rated" sweet spot for every movie. Overrated on what scale? According to whom? Such things are too relative and subjective to discuss seriously.
- Having said that.... yes, certainly some movies are overrated (and underrated)!
- I notice a tendency to overrate older movies (The Apartment? What?). "Old" doesn't necessarily mean "classic".
- One could argue that films are better today because the craft of filmmaking is always being honed, perfected, built upon. I agree.
- One could also argue that films are worse today because it's all been done already and there's nothing new or original anymore. I agree, to an extent.
- Only time will tell which movies of today (if any) will be the classics of the future.
- Who today has the stature of a Hitchcock, a Kubrick, a Kurosawa? (3 names that pop up far too often on this board, but that's another rant) Shaymalan? Fincher? Anderson? (Paul Thomas or Wes, take your pick) Is Peter Jackson the David Lean of our time? Will David Lynch ultimately be remembered as one of the greats, or simply a quirky director with a few good ideas?
- Starting to get totally off-topic, but why are there no "great" female directors?
- Films of the past ten years have strived too hard to be edgy, cynical and cool. I think of it as fallout from the grunge era. Movies today rarely seem to capture that sense of WONDERMENT one gets from watching the old classics. Recent exceptions: Fellowship of the Ring, Rushmore, Amelie.
- Does it really matter what's overrated or not? The most important thing is that ALL movies are preserved so that future generations can decide for themselves what they want to watch.

 

[Brian Kissinger]

The proliferation of countless (and often mindless) sequels is proof that Hollywood is creatively bankrupt

I think its just proof that Hollywood is in for the money. And to a certain extent I can't blame them. I just like to see more chances taken. Give more movies a try.

Great points, other Brian and Scott.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

Nice post BillBobs!
You really raised some great points, or, perhaps more accurately, things to ponder!
Very interesting!

 

[Brad Porter]

Dissecting Maltin's quote:
At a time of creative bankruptcy in Hollywood, discerning viewers are grateful for almost anything of value; this leads to "pretty good" movies being touted as "great," simply because they're the best films on hand...
I don't think Hollywood is any more "bankrupt" creatively at this point in time than it has been historically. The problem is that the studio marketing departments have corrupted film criticism by encouraging the strange creatures known as "quote whores". For every Freddy Got Fingered that gets released, there are dozens of favorable reviews from morning show entertainment reporters, college town newspaper scribes, and ordinary guys with web pages. For the general film consumer who is inundated with these disingenuous quotes, the line between "pretty good" and "great" is impossible to distinguish. The "discerning viewers" that Maltin speaks of are more likely to acknowledge their true opinion of a film independent of the critical consensus. So my response to Maltin here is that when a "discerning viewer" calls a film "great", he or she means it. When a "quote whore" calls a film "great", get a second opinion.
We could not and should not settle for second best, nor lose sight of what constitutes greatness.
This segment of the quote seems to suggest that there are universal standards for greatness, against which Maltin suggests highly rated modern films only rate "second best". There's enough room at the top for me to place Unforgiven at the same rank as High Noon and The Searchers, to suggest that Memento intrigues me every bit as much as The Maltese Falcon, or even to hold Rushmore in higher regard than The Graduate.
So while I agree that "greatness" is claimed far more often than it is deserved, I wouldn't agree with a claim that there are fewer "great" movies today than there have been at any time in the past. Your mileage may vary, however.
Brad

 

[SteveGon]

Brad, good point. I've been browsing Maltin's book and what would you say to something like this:
i am sam - :star: :star: :star: 1/2

 

[Steeve Bergeron]

I wouldn't agree with a claim that there are fewer "great" movies today than there have been at any time in the past.

Amen, Brad! Tell that to the film snobs who think that the only great films have been made before 1980.

 

[Agee Bassett]

As one of those dyed-in-the-wool "film snobs", I must agree with Maltin. There is no doubt in my mind that there is a certain, and obvious, "hemline effect" refracting the distance between the lack of quality cinematic product and the film-going public consciousness as we enter the 21st-century.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Gotta go with BillBobs - the idea of overrated and underrated are ridiculous. If everyone likes a film more than you - it's overrated. Less than you - it's underrated. Those terms assume your opinion (you being any one of us) is the correct and everyone else is wrong. It's a self-centered statement. Damn all those critics and the public.
I do feel there are more BAD movies today. But there are more movies today in general. Studios in the 50's wanted to make money. Wow, studios today want to make money! But I've had a great last year watching films. Moulin Rouge, Black Hawk Down, Fellowship of the Ring, The Bourne Identity, Amelie, Minority Report - what an outstanding diverse collection. I am just missing a great comedy! That doesn't even include Panic Room, which is a decent film by one of my favorite directors. Are those films "great"? Some will be remembered so...most won't. Time will tell. Not the film snobs, not the lowest common denominators, not the critics - time and the public will determine which films become great. Not us
Take care,
Chuck
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and it will remain there.

 

[Brook K]

Since Maltin took part in a panel TV show where movies were rated on their degree of "hotness", I don't think he's a very good judge of creative bankruptcy.
It all comes down to the director and writer, if they are talented, a good film will likely result. If they aren't, nada, regardless of whether or not it was made in Hollywood, independantly, or abroad.
Do I think fewer great films are being made today or that there are fewer great directors? No I don't. But because of market/profitability concerns and dubious jugdements about "what the public wants to see", fewer of the great films are getting seen by a wide audience.
I don't think there is any dearth of creativity, the problem is that Recycled Garbage Part VI opens on 3,500 screens, while films like Mulholland Drive, Hedwig And The Angry Inch, & In The Mood For Love play on 100-200. Or worse, like in the case of a great film like Code Unknown, never get any sort of theatrical release in the US.

 

[Christ Reynolds]

i agree with maltin, whats with gladiator and a beautiful mind? i think crowe was pretty good in a beautiful mind, but for both of them winning best picture is kind of stretching it. the movies were decent, but not wonderful. it seems so few are interested in writing a good story anymore. its all to make a buck. and whats with road to perdition being compared to the godfather? cmon, that movie was a slow gangster drama with a few (predictable) twists and turns. and a couple decent performances. not much else, but everyone seems to go nuts over it. and, whats with everyone calling m night shaymalan the next spielberg? 3 movies, two of them SUCKED, 6th sense was creepy, but soooo predictable. i guess if you think about it, spielberg hasnt done that many great movies, so maybe m night is the next in line. i guess ive stepped on enough toes in this post. i try to give movies a chance before i crap on them. i may be a movie snob, but i still enjoy the mindless movies. i like the rock and armageddon, but i know not to pick apart the stories, even though its not tough. but i still appreciate the finer things in movies, i'll defend hitchocks and kubricks work all day long, i love repo man because of the cult feel, and i think fargo is the best movie in the last 25 years. im not sure if this post has a point, but ive been stuck inside all day, and i guess i needed to vent huzzah!

 

[Steeve Bergeron]

Damn, Christ! I wanted to reply to that post. But I'll let it go this time because you're a new member.

 

[Garrett Lundy]

All in favor of exhuming the corpse of Akira Kurosawa and re-animating his body to make a few more great movies, say "Aye"




-Aye

 

[Jan H]

I!

 

[Rob Tomlin]

Not just Kurosawa....how about David Lean, Alfred Hitchcock, etc!

 

[JohnRice]

Donnie Darko
The Man Who Wasn't There
Monster's Ball
In the Bedroom
Lantana
Bubble Boy...damn right!
I consider all these 2001 films potential greats
Moulin Rouge
Memento
A.I.
LOTR
Mulholland Dr.
I consider all of these 2001 films at least very good.
Now, I know I am missing a few. On the whole, this is a pretty darn good batch. While I tend to agree with Maltin, in some ways, with things like Gladiator and A Beautiful Mind drawing so much attention, and most folks not bothering to seek out stuff that doesn't have a 50 million dollar marketing budget. Still, I suspect that most current years produce more quality stuff than most years in the past.

 

[Brian Kissinger]

Holy sweet Hell. I'm agreeing with Mr. Rice.

My argument is not that there aren't any good movies coming out, but that we are simply putting mediocre films higher up on the value chart than maybe they should be. And again, I'm not saying you, or anyone else. I'm talking about me personally. And from what I read around here, I think maybe others might be doing it as well. And more than likely, without even noticing. I know I don't until I look over my collection looking for some thing to watch. I'll see Resident Evil sitting there, and think why did I buy this again?

 

[SteveGon]

I'll see Resident Evil sitting there, and think why did I buy this again?

Could it be Milla Jovovich's...um, you know!

 

[JohnRice]

Send it to me then! Sure, it is far from great, but it is a hell of a lot of fun. Put it in the category with Killer Klowns from Outer Space and Starship Troopers. ......Actually, I take it back. I think maybe Resident Evil actually is a great movie. It does what it does about as well as anything else that has ever been made. After all, what is greatness? Does it have to be reserved only for socially significant or incomprehensible films?

How often do you actually laugh involuntarily and out loud while watching a "comedy?" Well...I was constantly doing that while watching Bubble Boy, so that makes it a genuine contender for greatness to me.

Yes, I agree with you to at least some point, Brian. Certain ones are just a bit inflated in the minds of the general public, as far as I'm concerned. LOTR was a good movie. It kept my attention and was fairly entertaining. It just didn't offer me nearly as much as any of the films in my top list, or to be honest, probably the bottom list either.


This is the kinder, gentler John Rice. For reasons I have mentioned elsewhere, I am a little tired of difficulty in my life right now.

 

[Brian Kissinger]

I'm not saying Resident Evil isn't any good. I like the movie. But I don't consider it great. Great to me is one of two things. One: A movie that I like so much, I will watch it over and over again. Two: A movie that moves me. I may not re-watch it much, but I must have it for when I do want to watch it. Resident Evil falls into neither one of those categories. I don't for-see me watching it a whole lot, and other than sweet, sweet Milla, it didn't move me either. I am not a wealthy man, and I'm often careful about what I purchase (or what my wife lets me purchase). It actually took me weeks to buy the Princess Bride special edition. Since I already had the first release, it was hard for me to buy it again. It's the movie I love, and I already had that. And I think I tricked myself into finding Resident Evil to be better than it actually was (to me). I still like the movie. I will watch it again, but probably not much. I have many movies along this line in my collection. And that's why I feel the way I do.

For what it's worth, Lord of the Rings falls into both of my great categories.

 

[JohnRice]

And while I thought LOTR was a nice movie, I was completely unmoved. Of course, just ask anyone who knows me, and they will tell you I'm completely insane.
BTW, I am a big fan of The Princess Bride, but I haven't and probably won't buy the SE. Mostly because I got really annoyed at MGM for a short while about their releasing habits, particularly on ones like Princess Bride and When Harry met Sally. Of course, now I think they are the best studio around with their DVDs.
BTW #2, I have been thinking of starting a thread on under appreciated films in the "Movie" section, and this thread has motivated me to do it. I'll start on it now. It is not a poll, since I expect folks to explain what they appreciate in their films, and I am avoiding the term "under rated" for what are hopefully fairly obvious reasons. Everyone drop by.