• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

overated SCIFI movies

Yes: 2001: A Space Odyssey. It is one of the most boring, awfully paced films I have ever seen.

2001 is a classic, and I understand why. Kubrick was a masterful director, and the subject matter, tone and especially the effects work and production design were revolutionary. It deserves all the accolades it gets and will always be a classic.

Yet it does nothing for me. Boring as fuck. 4th here.

God that film is boring. And I did see it in the theater once and it's a good thing I didn't snore
 
I still don't get how District 9 was a mind blowing experience when after I left I wanted to slit my wrist and shoot myself, but perhaps I'm just clueless on such matters.

Just remember: down the road, not across the street.

Are you sure? Seems like it would be easier to cut across and sever a bunch of arteries rather than try and cut one down and hope you get enough of it?

The blood can clot and closeup the cut if you cut across. Cut with the vein and the long cut cannot be closed by clotting.

Nothing more embarrassing than failing at self-termination.:devil:
 
I still don't get how District 9 was a mind blowing experience when after I left I wanted to slit my wrist and shoot myself, but perhaps I'm just clueless on such matters.

Just remember: down the road, not across the street.

Are you sure? Seems like it would be easier to cut across and sever a bunch of arteries rather than try and cut one down and hope you get enough of it?

No, I'm not sure. This calls for an experiment. :lol:
 
Batman: The Dark Knight

By no means, in my opinion, is Ledger's performance Oscar-worthy, unless it's to be understood as a posthumous lifetime achievement award. He's more than competent, granted ... but not much more than that.

2001: A Space Odyssey

Despite the claims made here, one can thoroughly grasp this film thematically and still find much of it a dreadful bore. I'm willing to suffer for my own art, but not Kubrick's.

Star Trek (2009)

Saying, "I enjoyed it," is one thing. Asserting, "It's a great [or even good] film!" (as so many have) is quite another.
 
Just remember: down the road, not across the street.

Are you sure? Seems like it would be easier to cut across and sever a bunch of arteries rather than try and cut one down and hope you get enough of it?

The blood can clot and closeup the cut if you cut across. Cut with the vein and the long cut cannot be closed by clotting.

Nothing more embarrassing than failing at self-termination.:devil:


Hmmm, I'll give it a try. If you don't hear back from me you know you were right.
 
Seconded. For special effects, I don't think any movie can beat it. I don't think any CGI was used in that movie. The whole time my jaw was dropped.

There's actually plenty of CGI used in the movie, but it's a testament to how good it is that you don't notice it. The filmmakers knew when to use models and when to use CGI. With just a few exceptions, it really holds up (visually).
 
2001, Trek 2009, First Contact, Matrix sequels, Solaris (all versions), Serenity, movies by M. Night Shyamalan, Silent Running
 
Scanners. I wanted to see this film for years and then when I did it was quite a letdown. Interesting idea, but the actual movie was severely lacking in plot. Kind of s standard chase movie. They'd be on the run looking for someone. They'd find that person and ten minutes later he'd be killed. Then they run some more and start the whole thing over.
 
ID4 was a box-office hit---but I don't know anybody who thinks it's great though. Why include that?

I liked it.

I like it too, but i don't think it's 'great' and I don't think it was ever considered great---unless you were a FOX studio boss in summer 1996----great money maker.

I agree. I don't think it's great either. But it was good, and that's why I liked it.
 
I liked it.

I like it too, but i don't think it's 'great' and I don't think it was ever considered great---unless you were a FOX studio boss in summer 1996----great money maker.

I agree. I don't think it's great either. But it was good, and that's why I liked it.

But then, on the flip side, 2001 is considered GREAT, but I consider it over-rated and not "great". So it cuts both ways.

Rob
 
I like it too, but i don't think it's 'great' and I don't think it was ever considered great---unless you were a FOX studio boss in summer 1996----great money maker.

I agree. I don't think it's great either. But it was good, and that's why I liked it.

But then, on the flip side, 2001 is considered GREAT, but I consider it over-rated and not "great". So it cuts both ways.

Rob

And we have finally reached complete accord.:bolian:
 
I would say the Matrix Trilogy for one, I did like 2001 and consider it a great movie but I wouldn't say it is the best sci fi film ever.

I also add Star Trek (2009) - Though I enjoyed it it wasn't up to the hype in my opinion.

Blade Runner, funny I guess I am weird I prefered the theatrical release, as a kid that grew up loving film noire like detective stories ala Philip Marlowe/ Sam Spade kinda stuff I rather liked the monotoned narration. For me it added atmosphere, and then the director wanting to add a mystery about is Ford a replicant or not...and the writers not wanting too...

Bah! Too much hype not enough greatness in the end result. So add the Blade Runner Director's Cut to the list for me.

and for us older folks that grew up during Ape - O- Mania. I never liked ANY of the sequels to Planet of the Apes. Couldn't get the continutity right even on the date from their previous film. Adding to the fact the original really didnt scream SEQUEL.

Too much hype and not enough greatness.

Vons
 
I'm not sure how highly rated it is, generally, but I really disliked "Silent Running". I've seen some five-star reviews and know it has a cult following, but to me it was incredibly tedious and depressing, with very annoying music. I found it impossible to sympathise with the protagonist, who murders his colleagues to save some plants and animals. It's not that I'm against an environmental message, far from it, but I really can't fathom what "message" they were trying to bring across with that.
Thank you. Silent Running is one of the worst movies ever made, at least that anyone ever thought was any good.

I remember some reviews for Moon said it had a Silent Running-type feel, so I checked it out before Moon came out around these parts, and all I could say at the end was, "Good God, I hope not."

The only thing the movie has going for it is that Joel Hodgson apparently liked it and thought the general premise would make a nice frame for MST3K. Fortunately, Joel never killed anyone in cold blood or blew up in an atomic explosion leaving Crow or Servo to tend to a boring garden till the end of time.

Greg Cox said:
Exactly, a movie can't be "overrated" if nobody in creation likes it!

God, that was a terrible movie.

Maybe it was overrated by me, since I'm one of the vanishingly small number of people who have ever defended it. :p But I still say it's one of the best of the franchise.
 
Blade Runner, funny I guess I am weird I prefered the theatrical release, as a kid that grew up loving film noire like detective stories ala Philip Marlowe/ Sam Spade kinda stuff I rather liked the monotoned narration. For me it added atmosphere
:techman::techman::techman::techman::bolian:
 
Blade Runner, funny I guess I am weird I prefered the theatrical release, as a kid that grew up loving film noire like detective stories ala Philip Marlowe/ Sam Spade kinda stuff I rather liked the monotoned narration. For me it added atmosphere
:techman::techman::techman::techman::bolian:

You know, I sat down to watch the international version on disc, since I bought the five disc version, and I can't even conceive of how one could enjoy Ford's narration. It adds nothing to the character, does not convey any additional plot or clear up confusion, and is delivered in such a nasally tone that it could believably create rumors that Harrison Ford deliberately sabatoged it. It is nothing like the classic voice over of Double Indemnity. What is it then, exactly, that people like so much about it?
 
Well for one thing it explains the gibberish Gav speaks. It gives a degree of insight into Deckard's mindset much like the whole detective films. It is more of an atmospheric thing for me. Brings me into the movie with Deckard as if he is talking to me and helps to set up how he feels.

Much like given his narration you can see his dislike for his 'captian' , dragging him into this mess, using the 'racist' term 'Skinjob'...and the like. Its not so much revealing as it is mood and atmosphere setting. It is a nod to the basic film style the movie is paying a homage to. Film Niore.

*shrugs* I dunno, I just kinda like it. I liked it when Magnum talked to us through narration in Magnum P.I. (a nod to the old detective films)

I loved it when Steve Martin did the voice over narration "Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid' which was a parody of the old film style while paying homage to them (Even using the old detective clips as a part of the films characters and plot :) )

And I like it still When Michael talks to his viewers the same way in Burn Notice.

The narration is just a flavor tool to set the character and some extra insights into his thoughts.

I like it.

Vons
 
I have several, you silly mofos...

1. 2001
2. Quest For Fire
3. Soylent Green
4. ET
5. Rollerball
6. The Shinnin' (The Shining. Ok, this is "horror" but whatevah!)

I know there's more...
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top