Topic: Overrated?

[AndyMuller]

I agree and think the sequel is miles better.

[afc tukrish]

Blade Runner.

I’m not saying it’s not a good film, I just don’t quite get it as one of the best in it’s genre.  I watched the 4K blu ray the other night, and it’s visually stunning but the story, characters, screenplay all leave me a bit “meh”.  I’ve seen it three or four times now, and it’s not an unpleasant couple of hours but it just seems to slip out of my mind a few days later. It’s not bad, it’s just a bit forgettable.

Nothing wrong with that of course, but it just doesn’t seem worthy of it’s lofty status. I’m obviously not seeing something others are seeing.

No attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion or C-beams glittering in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate?

[Buck Pete]

Luca Brasi.

Built up as a one man killing machine and is easily killed in an empty bar.

Very true.

Always been an Al Neri man myself SHP.

[jillcwhomever]

Charles Dickens. Ive tried and tried over the years but always struggle.

There is no way you can say he is overrated though, it's just not your thing. His books are incredible, not only that but also you also see the hardness of life in those times as well.

[Hazell]

Blade Runner.

I’m not saying it’s not a good film, I just don’t quite get it as one of the best in it’s genre.  I watched the 4K blu ray the other night, and it’s visually stunning but the story, characters, screenplay all leave me a bit “meh”.  I’ve seen it three or four times now, and it’s not an unpleasant couple of hours but it just seems to slip out of my mind a few days later. It’s not bad, it’s just a bit forgettable.

Nothing wrong with that of course, but it just doesn’t seem worthy of it’s lofty status. I’m obviously not seeing something others are seeing.

I agree and think the sequel is miles better.

I don't know if I agree about Blade Runner, for me it's definitely not forgettable and the characters are one of the best things in it (especially Sebastian, Pris and Roy Batty) and it's obviously visually stunning but I agree about Blade Runner 2049, I think I like it better than the original, it's absolutely brilliant - one for an underrated thread I think

[Kekule]

I agree and think the sequel is miles better.

I don't know if I agree about Blade Runner, for me it's definitely not forgettable and the characters are one of the best things in it (especially Sebastian, Pris and Roy Batty) and it's obviously visually stunning but I agree about Blade Runner 2049, I think I like it better than the original, it's absolutely brilliant - one for an underrated thread I think

I’ve had the sequel on Blu-Ray for ages and not got round to watching it, it was my intention to watch it later this week after having watched the first one the other night.

I’ll look forward to that then seeing as people are talking so highly of it. 

[Hedley Lamarr]

I think Blade runner is a great film, stunning to look at, highly influential, Ridley Scott is a fantastic world builder.  That said, I agree.  2049 is better in every way in my opinion.  I saw it twice theatrically, a grand total of about thirty people combined at both showings, It's one of those films that did much better on Blu-ray/DVD, probably because of its length.

[Agent99]

All these terrible opinions will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

[Son of Spion]

Blade Runner.

I’m not saying it’s not a good film, I just don’t quite get it as one of the best in it’s genre.  I watched the 4K blu ray the other night, and it’s visually stunning but the story, characters, screenplay all leave me a bit “meh”.  I’ve seen it three or four times now, and it’s not an unpleasant couple of hours but it just seems to slip out of my mind a few days later. It’s not bad, it’s just a bit forgettable.

Nothing wrong with that of course, but it just doesn’t seem worthy of it’s lofty status. I’m obviously not seeing something others are seeing.

Sacrilege is overrated. 

[bradders1011]

ferris buellers day off - is it just me that wanted to punch the smug twat

Spot on.

[Lastrador]

Promising Young Woman. Dreadful, shallow, misguided shit.

[GreatEx]

Yeah, I think just listing popular stuff that you don't personally like doesn't make for an interesting thread. I think it's more interesting to discuss stuff we appreciated that in retrospect doesn't meet the greatness tag that's been foisted upon it.

With that in mind, I agree with the Breaking Bad shouts. I watched the whole thing and really enjoyed it, but there were several weak points that I glossed over. Jesse was frequently irritating ("magnets!" etc); Skyler, Walt Jr and Marie were terrible characters, Gus was good but a bit hammy, the Salamanca twins were nothing but ham, etc. The writing was mostly excellent but also lazy at times: there's only so many times I can abide a character talking his way out of imminent execution with a "but wait! What if..." spiel - can bad guys ever just put a bullet in a protagonist after wiping out dozens of extras with nary a glance? Apparently not.

It's a very entertaining show, excellent even, but I'm not sure it belongs at the very pinnacle like some people have it. In terms of deep insight or impeccable artistry, shows like The Wire and Fargo are a level above.

[Sarge]

Agree on your Breaking Bad points, it was me who posted about it, one more point if i can is that it was possibly a Season to long and a lot of the stuff in it was not needed, if you get me, it was dragged out a little.


The Wire in just brilliant.

[jillcwhomever]

Agree on your Breaking Bad points, it was me who posted about it, one more point if i can is that it was possibly a Season to long and a lot of the stuff in it was not needed, if you get me, it was dragged out a little.


The Wire in just brilliant.

A lot of American shows seem to last forever, its one of the reasons I rarely watch too many of them. While I understand some shows are more complicated and take longer to develop, when its going on past ten series, it has to be really well written to still be interesting. So many shows  go on for too long. I prefer shows that have a briefer period like five, six series.

[GreatEx]

American shows almost universally go on too long, and many (especially the serial comedies) take a long time to warm up, too - how many times have you told friends "you just have to stick with it another 5-6 hours" after they rejected your recommendation two episodes in? That's where a show like Fargo stands out: its first episode had so many major events, you couldn't imagine how they were going to fill the next 9 episodes. That is special.

I can't think of any show that has stayed good past 10 seasons. It's mad to think that at least 3/4 of The Simpsons, which I still consider one of the all-time greats, is utter garbage.

[Sarge]

A lot of American shows seem to last forever, its one of the reasons I rarely watch too many of them. While I understand some shows are more complicated and take longer to develop, when its going on past ten series, it has to be really well written to still be interesting. So many shows  go on for too long. I prefer shows that have a briefer period like five, six series.

Completely agree and then some shows needed a S2 to expand on it.

[Sarge]

American shows almost universally go on too long, and many (especially the serial comedies) take a long time to warm up, too - how many times have you told friends "you just have to stick with it another 5-6 hours" after they rejected your recommendation two episodes in? That's where a show like Fargo stands out: its first episode had so many major events, you couldn't imagine how they were going to fill the next 9 episodes. That is special.

I can't think of any show that has stayed good past 10 seasons. It's mad to think that at least 3/4 of The Simpsons, which I still consider one of the all-time greats, is utter garbage.

I really do get that, ok i will admit ive never seen Fargo, Movie or TV show maybe because of the Coens never got them to be honest.

[liverbloke]

American shows almost universally go on too long, and many (especially the serial comedies) take a long time to warm up, too - how many times have you told friends "you just have to stick with it another 5-6 hours" after they rejected your recommendation two episodes in? That's where a show like Fargo stands out: its first episode had so many major events, you couldn't imagine how they were going to fill the next 9 episodes. That is special.

I can't think of any show that has stayed good past 10 seasons. It's mad to think that at least 3/4 of The Simpsons, which I still consider one of the all-time greats, is utter garbage.

the simpsons lost its way after season 7

it's only kept alive by the popularity of its characters - a bit like a lot of the american shows you point at

[redk84]

I'm going to watch again, but Sopranos.
I remember putting it off for years and finally watching it and being underwhelmed

Its been some time but I think the way some of the characters developed didn't sit right with me at the time..
Not saying its bad. Just not the top 5 sorta show I was expecting

And I try not to be contrarian when watching recommended shows, but as neutral as possible. Loved breaking bad, the wire, dexter etc when watching after everyone else had already seen them

[Sheer Magnetism]

Having watched Only Lovers Left Alive recently, I though it was hugely overrated and actually sums up Jarmusch well as a director. Great concept, great cast, good music, two-dimensional (at best) characters and barely anything in terms of plot. His films always seem to be less than the sum of their parts, and rather dull. And he has an extremely poser-y, Gen X idea of what's cool.

I also saw recently that Michael Jackson's Dangerous is showing up on a lot of Greatest Album Ever lists, which is weird. One great songs, three or four decent songs and a lot of stuff that's in the range of okay to dross. It would be a decent album if it was 10 tracks and 50 minutes long, as opposed to 14 tracks and 76 minutes, but either way it isn't a patch on Thriller.

[Sarge]

Dont get me started on Bands or singers i'll be here until Christmas.

[Only Me]

Probably a massively controversial choice, but what about The Jam?

One of my absolute favourite bands growing up. Loved them. I was just at the right age to be totally besotted by them at their peak.

But now, can barely stand anything they’ve done. Take away the context of the time they were written in, and the songs just don’t stand up. Musically, they’re just not that good.

Might be in part because Weller is a pretentious and hypocritical twat, but I honestly just don’t think the music is very good.

And “The Modfather”? Oh do fuck off.

[GreatEx]

^ yeah, I've had similar discussions about the likes of Nirvana - some bands are very much of their age, and someone coming into them now might not get what the fuss is about, or in cases like yourself, might even come back to it later and wonder what they saw in it. But I'm not sure it's fair to judge bands outside of their zeitgeist - Nirvana were hugely important in the early 90s in establishing that sort of outcast, shabbily dressed, embrace-your-loneliness vibe. I can still recall the feeling they evoked in me as a teenager who didn't know how to talk to girls, and respect them for it, even though I probably haven't deliberately listened to them in 20 years.

[BarryCrocker]

Dont get me started on Bands or singers i'll be here until Christmas.

Christmas

[liverbloke]

^ yeah, I've had similar discussions about the likes of Nirvana - some bands are very much of their age, and someone coming into them now might not get what the fuss is about, or in cases like yourself, might even come back to it later and wonder what they saw in it. But I'm not sure it's fair to judge bands outside of their zeitgeist - Nirvana were hugely important in the early 90s in establishing that sort of outcast, shabbily dressed, embrace-your-loneliness vibe. I can still recall the feeling they evoked in me as a teenager who didn't know how to talk to girls, and respect them for it, even though I probably haven't deliberately listened to them in 20 years.

point 1 - erm the beatles don't do too badly on that front

point 2 - so you have deliberately made a choice not to listen to them?

[Sheer Magnetism]

^ yeah, I've had similar discussions about the likes of Nirvana - some bands are very much of their age, and someone coming into them now might not get what the fuss is about, or in cases like yourself, might even come back to it later and wonder what they saw in it. But I'm not sure it's fair to judge bands outside of their zeitgeist - Nirvana were hugely important in the early 90s in establishing that sort of outcast, shabbily dressed, embrace-your-loneliness vibe. I can still recall the feeling they evoked in me as a teenager who didn't know how to talk to girls, and respect them for it, even though I probably haven't deliberately listened to them in 20 years.

Are you actually comparing The Jam (great choice for this thread BTW) and Nirvana?

[AndyMuller]

^ yeah, I've had similar discussions about the likes of Nirvana - some bands are very much of their age, and someone coming into them now might not get what the fuss is about, or in cases like yourself, might even come back to it later and wonder what they saw in it. But I'm not sure it's fair to judge bands outside of their zeitgeist - Nirvana were hugely important in the early 90s in establishing that sort of outcast, shabbily dressed, embrace-your-loneliness vibe. I can still recall the feeling they evoked in me as a teenager who didn't know how to talk to girls, and respect them for it, even though I probably haven't deliberately listened to them in 20 years.

Nah, this doesn't add up. Nirvana still get play to this day even by the younger generation, The Jam are the epitome of a Brexit band and thus should be forgotten.

[Nobby Reserve]

some bands are very much of their age, and someone coming into them now might not get what the fuss is about, or in cases like yourself, might even come back to it later and wonder what they saw in it.

The Stone Roses & Oasis fall into that.

In fact, most of that BritPop music that seemed decent at the time now sounds shite.

I loved it at the time, but there's few I can listen too now without wondering WTF I saw in them (Pulp and Happy Mondays/Black Grape are two exceptions I wouldn't have reckoned on)

[Nobby Reserve]

The Jam are the epitome of a Brexit band and thus should be forgotten.

Please explain.

[Pistolero]

Personally I'd say The Clash were more overrated than The Jam...and I'm speaking as someone who loved both of them...

[AndyMuller]

Please explain.

It was a joke but I find it funny everything to do with the band has the British flag on it.

[Lee1-6Liv]

Punk, just a load of lads who can't play instruments with a singer who can't sing (could be most bands these days)

[liverbloke]

It was a joke but I find it funny everything to do with the band has the British flag on it.

actually their political position was to the left not the right - i feel brexit was a vote from the right side of the left if that makes sense - a bit like those labour supporters who voted tory - and spoke up about those things and wrote hit songs about them too

the use of the flag was because they were proud to be british and loved the use of that iconography throughout the original mod scene of the 60s - they were heavily influenced by the who

paul weller, though immensely talented, does admit that he is a vain twat though and does like to be noticed so that wrangles with people and the mod-father title was given to him he didn't call himself that

but fair enough this is a thread where people can feel someone or something is overrated and that's your call - i call things out all the time 

[Sheer Magnetism]

Paul Weller has arguably done more to harm British music than anyone this side of Simon Cowell. Perennially parochial, always looking backwards while his contemporaries were breaking boundaries and looking to do something new. Burton suits, they think it's funny, turning rebellion into money.

Precious is great though, as were the first Oasis album and the Stone Roses before they went all Led Zep.

[Dubred]

^ yeah, I've had similar discussions about the likes of Nirvana - some bands are very much of their age, and someone coming into them now might not get what the fuss is about, or in cases like yourself, might even come back to it later and wonder what they saw in it. But I'm not sure it's fair to judge bands outside of their zeitgeist - Nirvana were hugely important in the early 90s in establishing that sort of outcast, shabbily dressed, embrace-your-loneliness vibe. I can still recall the feeling they evoked in me as a teenager who didn't know how to talk to girls, and respect them for it, even though I probably haven't deliberately listened to them in 20 years.

I'm the opposite when it comes to Nirvana.  Was a teenager in the 90s.  Into the whole scene.  Big fan of Pearl Jam/ Soundgarden etc.  Thought Nirvana were ok but just couldn't get them.  Even saw them in concert in '92 and thought meh.....

However they've grown on me the older I've gotten and I have to say I love their music.  And for me their music very much still stands up today and has aged well.

[liverbloke]

Paul Weller has arguably done more to harm British music than anyone this side of Simon Cowell. Perennially parochial, always looking backwards while his contemporaries were breaking boundaries and looking to do something new. Burton suits, they think it's funny, turning rebellion into money.

Precious is great though, as were the first Oasis album and the Stone Roses before they went all Led Zep.

strummer has never ever openly said that is aimed at the jam

Included is a jibe at unnamed groups who wear Burton suits. In an NME article at the time, Strummer said this was targeted at the power pop fad hyped by journalists as the next big thing in 1978. The lyric concludes that the new groups are in it only for money and fame.

but let's not forget that strummer also played the game and had popular hits through the music business too so who is calling who here?

i like both bands so it's not for me to argue with your likes or dislikes - just putting the real facts out there

[Sheer Magnetism]

How exactly did Strummer 'play the game'? He was practically at war with CBS most of the time the band were together, calling them out on Complete Control and continually lobbying for them to drop the prices of Clash records so they could be made affordable. Or are we going for the ultra-low bar of 'making music videos' or 'touring with bigger bands'?

In any case, The Jam (who were making guitar pop while wearing chain-store suits) stand out from the crop of '77 bands for looking backwards to mod, recording albums with a 60's classic rock producer while singing bland, dated cliche lines like 'the kids know where it's at' instead of looking stylistically forward. That is also a fact.

[Pistolero]

How exactly did Strummer 'play the game'? He was practically at war with CBS most of the time the band were together, calling them out on Complete Control and continually lobbying for them to drop the prices of Clash records so they could be made affordable. Or are we going for the ultra-low bar of 'making music videos' or 'touring with bigger bands'?

In any case, The Jam (who were making guitar pop while wearing chain-store suits) stand out from the crop of '77 bands for looking backwards to mod, recording albums with a 60's classic rock producer while singing bland, dated cliche lines like 'the kids know where it's at' instead of looking stylistically forward. That is also a fact.

Just wondering, did you see the Jam live, in their pomp?

[liverbloke]

How exactly did Strummer 'play the game'? He was practically at war with CBS most of the time the band were together, calling them out on Complete Control and continually lobbying for them to drop the prices of Clash records so they could be made affordable. Or are we going for the ultra-low bar of 'making music videos' or 'touring with bigger bands'?

In any case, The Jam (who were making guitar pop while wearing chain-store suits) stand out from the crop of '77 bands for looking backwards to mod, recording albums with a 60's classic rock producer while singing bland, dated cliche lines like 'the kids know where it's at' instead of looking stylistically forward. That is also a fact.

well to play the game you must be involved in it - he was a part of the music business by being part of the music business and he took the money - regardless of whether it was reduced or not

it's like saying 'this business stinks' 'this business abuses' 'this business is wrong' but i'm going to sign that contract from the man from this business

listen, i know the guy wasn't out to fuck anyone over and he had good ideals but he was part of that machine - a machine he hated i know

and yeh we all know you hate the jam - it's getting a bit boring now

[Sarge]

The Stone Roses & Oasis fall into that.

In fact, most of that BritPop music that seemed decent at the time now sounds shite.

I loved it at the time, but there's few I can listen too now without wondering WTF I saw in them (Pulp and Happy Mondays/Black Grape are two exceptions I wouldn't have reckoned on)

100% nailed it, early 90s stuff now alot of it is aweful shite.