most overrated movies?

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by R.Graves, May 11, 2016.

  1. TorontoReign

    TorontoReign ⛧卐⛧ [REDACTED]

    Apr 1, 2005
    Nope. The first Matrix still holds up visually. Just watched it. The plot is also not as predictable as you make it out to be. It was pretty unique at the time.
     
  2. ThatZenoGuy

    ThatZenoGuy Residential Zealous Evolved Nano Organism

    Nov 8, 2016
    Yeah, Matrix is a pretty good movies.

    The sequels are what kinda ruined the movie IMO.

    Matrix 1 was more pratical effects, while 2-3 used more CGI.
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 2
  3. TorontoReign

    TorontoReign ⛧卐⛧ [REDACTED]

    Apr 1, 2005
    Best to forget the second and third movie exist.
     
  4. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Antediluvian as Feck

    Nov 26, 2007
    Transformers (any, after the first; IE any with Micheal Bay involved).

    Mad Max:Fury Road.
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  5. ThatZenoGuy

    ThatZenoGuy Residential Zealous Evolved Nano Organism

    Nov 8, 2016
    Yeah, as an Aussie, I fucking hate Fury Road.

    Its like.

    "Hey, lets make a Mad Max movie, without Mel Gibson, and somehow he gets his car back after 3 showed us that MAD MAX NOW USES ANIMALS"
     
  6. naossano

    naossano So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs

    Oct 19, 2006
    I would say that the big problem with Inception is that they spent three quarter of the movie with exposition, explaining things that wouldn't even pay off later, then one remaining quarter with a long generic action scene. (and a bit of okayish Dicaprio\Cottillard subplot)
     
  7. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Antediluvian as Feck

    Nov 26, 2007
    I think that's pretty accurate. I also suspect that they lost a lot of people on the concept of physical (outside) inertia in the dream world.
     
  8. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    ... That character is bigger than mel gibson. Besides Tom hardy did well.
    One its most likely a reboot

    Two his car was destroyed in road warrior and he found it in the third and its not out of the realm of possibility to think he got it back after the credits rolled
     
  9. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Antediluvian as Feck

    Nov 26, 2007
    I didn't particularly care for his results as Max.

    I think Tom Jane would have been a better choice; (aside from also looking the part)... but then anyone would have had to act with the script they were given, and that seemed pretty weak IMO. :(
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  10. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    Tom jane is near 50 himself. That would defeat the whole point of reversing the character.
     
  11. YeeCop

    YeeCop Just a Sweet Irradiated Transvestite

    285
    Jan 26, 2017
    I think Fury Road is really cool cause of the fan theory that Tom Hardy's Max is the Feral Kid from Mad Max 2.
     
  12. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Antediluvian as Feck

    Nov 26, 2007
    They shouldn't have reversed it. The series was linear; it showed what Max was originally, and why he became the Road Warrior, and later where he ended up—after the Feral boy last saw him.

    IMO they should have cast Bruce Spense as well. Tom Jane (I think) could have passed for Max in the last installment of the series... Instead of making a reboot that was not worth having its own sequel.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  13. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    Well I hope to see much more from nu-max. If something can only be considered bad in comparison to its predecessor rather than on it's own merits then its not that bad imo. I wouldn't even call fury road lesser in the first place, personally.
     
  14. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Antediluvian as Feck

    Nov 26, 2007
    Can you apply that to FO3?


    *I think that FO3 has its own merits, but that they should not have released it as Fallout 3.
    (I could say this almost verbatim for Mad Max:Fury Road)

    **And with that... We're off topic. I've been trying to think of a few overrated films, but I'm drawing a blank, and the obvious ones are a little too obvious, or already mentioned.

    Or else I could say Ironman 3.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2017
  15. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    No, because fallout 3 is horrible on it's own merits. Even ignoring that its a sequel, it still has no worldbuilding, bland characters, horrible story, linear quests, clunky combat, and no ending.

    I mean the plot itself is inconsistent with the environment its set in. 'Nuff said.
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  16. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Antediluvian as Feck

    Nov 26, 2007
    Ah, but I meant the "only be considered bad in comparison to its predecessor " part.

    FO3 was the wrong gameplay for the series—silly script aside. It was bad because it was the wrong game; not because it was a bad game. Likewise (IMO) Fury Road was bad because it was the wrong movie, not (just) because it was a bad one.

    Respective tastes in games and films are subjective, but format is either correct, or it isn't.

    I'm hoping there isn't a sequel to either. It's too bad FO4 already exists, but I hope FO5 doesn't happen... At least not with Bethesda at the helm.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2017
  17. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    No, I can safely say it's bad for both reasons.

    See
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  18. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Antediluvian as Feck

    Nov 26, 2007
    ...So you agree then. :roll: (and you mean 'Yes')

    *(I didn't think I'd need to clarify FO3, the way I did with Fury Road. )
     
  19. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    No. Because if it was just different but still good (like new vegas) then it's still good, like fury road is different (kind of) but good. New vegas is good on it's own merits outside of being a sequel fo3 is not.
     
  20. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Antediluvian as Feck

    Nov 26, 2007
    Did I say that it was?