I have to go with 300. It was just so over-hyped going in, and ended up being nothing more than a mediocre movie featuring a bunch of yelling, half-naked, buff men.
The light of existence shall shine through all eternity. Unless, of course, someone forgets to replace the bulb.
Posts: 4 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 14 November 2007
I'm going with Zodiac. All the hype I heard, rushed out to see it and it was meandering, boring, overlong, and anti-climatic. Utterly disappointed...could have just watched the Zodiac Killer Biography channel special at home.
Posts: 693 | Location: kentucky | Registered: 02 October 2007
I must agree with all three of the above posts, particularly the latest installment of the Bourne series. I went to see it during the afternoon, and then watched a German movie called "Soundless" on DVD that same night, and there was no comparison, despite the fact that Soundless probably had 1/100th of the budget and was in German. Frankly, the Bourne movie typifies what is ailing in American cinema. Forget the script, and any real acting, just shake the camera about, stage a car chase,and blow things up, and call it a movie.
300 was just what I thought it would be, so I was not as disappointed. Basically an attempt to get in on the geek-fest D&D crowd that loved the Lord of The Rings trilogy.
I gone quite as far as saying that BOURNE ULTIMATUM, 300, ZODIAC are the "most" over-rated movies, I will agree that they are over-rated movies in my opinion as I found significant faults with all of them.
Posts: 1481 | Location: Utah, United States | Registered: 22 July 2005
For me it's the Simpson Movie. With all the good reviews, I was expecting a good movie and got an average film.
People kept telling me it was "good" because they were expecting less but still.. the praise it has received just doesn't match up with what it was in the end.
I'm definitely in the minority on this one, but I just have to put my most over-rated movie out there to really understand what's with this movie. I just came back from seeing No Country for Old Men and I really was disappointed with the movie. I didn't like it at all. It was just a lot of predictable, Hitchcockian wannabies...I wasn't impressed.
Posts: 1481 | Location: Utah, United States | Registered: 22 July 2005
Bratz The Movie I went to the theater expecting a classic film and left utterly dissapointed. Just kidding. My pick would be Spider Man 3 It grossed so much money but turned out to be just a jumbled mess of a movie that after watching it twice just made it worse.
Pulp Fiction (1994)
Jules: Normally, both your asses would be dead as fucking fried chicken, but you happen to pull this shit while I'm in a transitional period so I don't wanna kill you, I wanna help you. But I can't give you this case, it don't belong to me. Besides, I've already been through too much shit this morning over this case to hand it over to your dumb ass.
You are correct. Spiderman 3 was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Is it that much to ask to have decently contrived story and a script? Sometimes I think the studios need to take a step back from the special effects monitor, and hire somebody with half a brain stem to actually write a decent movie.
I've said what you said too many times. The worst movies I've seen this year also happened to be the most expensive: Spiderman 3, Pirates of the Carribean 3, and Transformers. While all contained some impressive special effects, neither told a coherent enough story to actually entertain me. I'm certain that good special effects and a good story aren't mutually exclusive things, so I'm always baffled how a studio can justify dumping hundreds of millions of dollars into a movie and not even bother developing a decent (not even great, just decent!) script.
----- Use all your well-learned politesse or I'll lay your soul to waste.
Posts: 5923 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
Originally posted by EricG75: I've said what you said too many times. The worst movies I've seen this year also happened to be the most expensive: Spiderman 3, Pirates of the Carribean 3, and Transformers. While all contained some impressive special effects, neither told a coherent enough story to actually entertain me. I'm certain that good special effects and a good story aren't mutually exclusive things, so I'm always baffled how a studio can justify dumping hundreds of millions of dollars into a movie and not even bother developing a decent (not even great, just decent!) script.
I feel proud to say I didn’t see any of those three films; maybe I’m just smarter than you.
I’m joking of course. I think everyone here knows I’m as bright as a bag of rocks.
----- Never say you miss her, never say a word. And do everything she'd never do.
Posts: 6627 | Location: Texas | Registered: 27 December 2005
Originally posted by FragileKidA: I feel proud to say I didn’t see any of those three films; maybe I’m just smarter than you.
Ha. I didn't pay full price for any of them. We have a pretty nice second run theater here. It's $2 (Cheaper than a DVD rental!), and it's actually a much nicer theater than the big Multiplex. I'll usually go see anything I'm remotely interested in that plays there, even if I don't expect it to be great.
----- Use all your well-learned politesse or I'll lay your soul to waste.
Posts: 5923 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
Boy, I'm really striking the bottom here as a minority but...it's the truth...I really enjoyed Spiderman Three and I've put it on my top ten list of best movies of 2007 (tentatively hanging onto the seventh spot). I found the themes of betrayal and the tension between good and evil, the not so evil badguy fascinating to watch in the movie. I understood and felt what was going on. For me it was compelling stuff for the mainstream audience. Most of the severe complaints seem to come from those comicbook fans who demanded more from this movie. I for one didn't.
Posts: 1481 | Location: Utah, United States | Registered: 22 July 2005
