• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Unpopular or Uncommon Opinions

Bill

Bill

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
12,474
hydroazuanacaine said:
i don't think we already have a thread like that. and it sounds like fun. start 'er up!
Click to expand...

I've never seen any of the Indiana Jones movies or Blade Runner and don't care to anytime soon.
How about you?

This thread is for your unpopular opinions on specific cinema or television that you usually wouldn't even talk about any other time.
 
Braveheart is boring mush.

Jules et Jim is dragging, pointless back and forth. in no way is it a positive contribution to film.

Trainspotting is laughably stupid.

kubrick should be restless in his grave over Lolita.

Sin City is trash.

Eraserhead goes beyond boring and is actually annoying.

Oldboy is silly and stupid.

South Park's humor isn't and never was worth the vileness

Dancer in the Dark is a gimmick that just won't stop.

Drugstore Cowboy is cheese.

Silence of the Lambs was not groundbreaking. it is not worth watching.

The Graduate is nothing more than alright.

American Gangster is not badass.



Somewhere is not a complete failure.

Romeo + Juliet ('96) is awesome.

That 70s Show is a classic.
 
i love queen of the damned


there i said it. the script is fantastic.
 
Woody Allen is one of the most over-rated film makers of all time. I'm not sure what the world finds so fascinating about a creepy little Jewish guy talking nervously about sex.

Black Swan was pretentious.

The Social Network was boring.

Paul was a waste of talent.

The Fighter was unwatchable.

Inception was stupid.

The Beaver was one of the best films of the year.

Lars von Trier's "The Idiots" is better than anything Hollywood has ever produced.
 
i like titanic and the notebook.

i agree with hydro's opinions of oldboy and braveheart.
 
I came to conclusion that Girl with the Dragon tattoo was just written to be a movie, just like DaVinci Code and Jurassic Park. The book thing was just an elaborate marketing scheme. Books with no linguistic talent and all plot and action can't be considered anything other than rough-drafts for movie scripts.
 
I agree with hydro about Braveheart and Sin City.

Although I love some post Lolita Kubrick.
 
Eyes Wide Shut - Kubrick's best
Lars Von Trier - Makes bad movies; will never make a good one
David Lynch - Best director of all time
Norm MacDonald - would play good villain in serious movie
Al Pacino - rarely gives a decent performance; legacy will be mediocrity
George Clooney - most watchable actor
 
I like this thread.

The Fountain is director Darren Aronofskys best film. Requiem for a Dream is overrated and unrealistic.

Fight Club does not stand the test of time and repeated viewings make you realize that it is actually quite a boring movie.

The Deer Hunter is a terrible movie with a few great performances.
 
ForEverAfter said:
Woody Allen is one of the most over-rated film makers of all time. I'm not sure what the world finds so fascinating about a creepy little Jewish guy talking nervously about sex.
Click to expand...
sounds like you underrate him...
ForEverAfter said:
Lars von Trier's "The Idiots" is better than anything Hollywood has ever produced.
Click to expand...
indeed.

monty python and the holy grail is, for the most part, not funny.

alasdair
 
Kudos to you for agreeing with my von Trier vs. Hollywood comment.

sounds like you underrate him
Click to expand...

My comment was perhaps too harsh. I find some of his work to be amusing, but it baffles to me as to why he is considered such a great film-maker. He is idiosyncratic, eccentric, old, Jewish, memorable, yes. But a great film maker? I don't see it. Despite some admittedly witty dialogue, he seems to be a fairly single-minded sexually obsessed artist. And there's nothing wrong with that, of course. But I don't think it warrants criticial acclaim.

I hate Zooey Deschanel. I hate her names (both of them), her face, the contant fucking flirtatious shit that every one of her "characters" revolves around like a flimsly layer of cheap nail polish.
 
my comment on your underrating him was more a comment on the idea that terms like 'underrated' and 'overrated' are essentially meaningless when discussing something as subjective as art.

alasdair
 
Forgive me for pressing you, but doesn't that basically mean that the term "over-rated" has no function whatsoever? Everything is subjective. What are appropriate uses of the term, in your opinion. Give me an example. In the context of art, it seems to me that "over-rated" means that someone or something has reveiceved an undue amount of praise, and "under-rated" means that they are underappreciated. I don't understand how either term is meaningless. It is my opinion, for example, that Gary Oldman has not received the nominations he deserves as an actor. I believe him to be "under-rated," at least by the Academy. Subjectivity doesn't really come into it. It is my opinion. Am I missing something?
 
you said woody allen was overrated. perhaps you underrate him?

:)

alasdair
 
ForEverAfter said:
Forgive me for pressing you, but doesn't that basically mean that the term "over-rated" has no function whatsoever?
Click to expand...
yes.
ForEverAfter said:
What are appropriate uses of the term, in your opinion.
Click to expand...
i do not believe the terms are appropriate to this kind of discussion.
ForEverAfter said:
In the context of art, it seems to me that "over-rated" means that someone or something has reveiceved an undue amount of praise...
Click to expand...
why undue? if 500,000 people like a movie and give it praise, it seems to me that amount of praise is due - 500,000 don't think the praise is undue.
ForEverAfter said:
I don't understand how either term is meaningless. It is my opinion, for example, that Gary Oldman has not received the nominations he deserves as an actor. I believe him to be "under-rated," at least by the Academy.
Click to expand...
not really - you're overrating him...
ForEverAfter said:
Subjectivity doesn't really come into it. It is my opinion. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
is there anything more subjective than an opinion? :)

i've long been of the opinion that the terms 'underrated' and 'overrated' are meaningless when it comes to art. in my experience 'underrated' generally means 'i don't understand why other people don't like them as much as i do' and 'overrated' means 'they're mainstream and i've convinced myself i'm cooler than people who like them because i don't like them'. or something like that :)

for me, in the case of the former, the "i don't understand" bit is much more important than the "other people don't like them as much as i do" bit. it's the crux, really.

alasdair
 
why undue. if 500,00 people like a movie and give it praise, it seems to me that amount of praise is entirely due.
Click to expand...

lol

That is all I'm gonna say on that ;)
 
i'm not suggesting for one second that "more people like it" automatically equals "it's better".

my problem is with this idea that, whether you agree or disagree with the opinions of those others, their praise is "undue". you're basically saying those people are wrong and i am right when it's not a case of right and wrong.

"woody allen is overrated" basically means "i don't like woody allen and i can't understand why other people do". again, it's the "i don't understand" bit which carries the most weight in that statement...

alasdair
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top