Overrated Movies

[Drtooth]

That's kind of like the point of Rover Dangerfield too: it's basically a stand-up routine about Rodney Dangerfield's life as a dog. I know a lot of people (well, mostly Nostalgia Critic obviously) don't like it, but I don't mind it at all, mainly because it's one of those movies from my childhood... like the Tom and Jerry Movie *Ducks out of shooting range*

Eh, that's nostalgia for you. It makes you like things that you would otherwise hate. The problem with me is, that movie came out much later for me. I honestly thought they were making one only because they made an Itchy and Scratchy movie and I thought the Simpsons writers must know something I don't.

For me, I actually watched the actual Tom and Jerry shorts since I was really little due to local syndicated packaging. I didn't see the movie until I don't know when (maybe I was in high school), and it was on TV... and I turned it off in disgust halfway.

And don't even get me started on the confusion of it's two direct-to-video sequels... "Goes to Mars" was released in 1998, and "To the Rescue" was released in 1999, however, the events of "To the Rescue" (Rob and Kris being in college and dating) took place before "Goes to Mars" (Rob and Kris being married and having a baby, while Rob now has his own veterinary practice)... as it turns out, "To the Rescue" WAS released before "Goes to Mars", in 1997 to be exact... in all other countries BUT the U.S., where for some reason, it's release was delayed two years, and didn't come out until "Goes to Mars" was already released in 1998.

I never bothered with those. I did see the Nutcracker one, and I was kinda unimpressed by it. I mean, I felt it captured the spirit of Tom and Jerry more than the other movie, but I don't think that zip chase works well for 80 minutes anyway. They're threatening to make a live action/CGI one... if they made the cat and mouse realistic and not realistic cartoon hybrid, I'd almost go and see that.

 

[D'Snowth]

I never bothered with those. I did see the Nutcracker one, and I was kinda unimpressed by it. I mean, I felt it captured the spirit of Tom and Jerry more than the other movie, but I don't think that zip chase works well for 80 minutes anyway. They're threatening to make a live action/CGI one... if they made the cat and mouse realistic and not realistic cartoon hybrid, I'd almost go and see that.

Um, actually, I was talking about the direct-to-video sequels for Brave Little Toaster.

 

[beatnikchick300]

I don't get the big deal about Disney's the Hunchback of Notre Dame (runs away to avoid being kicked).

I'm sorry, but I just don't get the big deal. Yeah, the animation's lovely, and it has some good songs, but it's just another unnecessary sugar-coating of an actually tragic story (*cough*The Little Mermaid*cough*). I could honestly never see it again in my life and not be sorry.
I also think Pocahontas is overrated. The only thing I hate more than sugar coating a tragic story is sugar-coating history, complete with cute animal friends.

Even though I enjoy it, I think the second Night of the Museum movie gets more credit than it deserves. Why, you may ask? Because people actually think of it as a good movie; I just like it because I think it's hilariously bad. Maybe if it didn't make half the historical figures in it look like buffoons, and had an actually scary villain instead of an over-acting sissy (no offense to Hank Azaria, because he's awesome), it could have been legitimately good, but it's not.

End of rant.

 

[Drtooth]

I don't get the big deal about Disney's the Hunchback of Notre Dame (runs away to avoid being kicked).

I'm sorry, but I just don't get the big deal. Yeah, the animation's lovely, and it has some good songs, but it's just another unnecessary sugar-coating of an actually tragic story (*cough*The Little Mermaid*cough*). I could honestly never see it again in my life and not be sorry.
I also think Pocahontas is overrated. The only thing I hate more than sugar coating a tragic story is sugar-coating history, complete with cute animal friends.

I never heard of Hunchback of Notre Dame being overrated in any circle. The opinions I've heard are either "WHY?!" or "eh, it's not half bad." I like it for the Gargoyles. But I have a biased as I like Jason Alexander. But I hardly find the story all that sugar soaked. I mean, the villain of the movie is a psychotic Knights Templar priest that wants genocide of the Gypses because he feels his completely disturbing stalker attraction to Esmeralda are the work of Satan. Sure, it didn't have the ending where Esmerelda dies and Quasi buries himself alive with her (in a Dr. Phibes kinda way), but neither did any of the other films based on it.

My opinions on the movie are thus: Fans of the original book will complain about how they cleaned stuff up and made a happy ending because none of it would be Disney-esque and family friendly. but I hardly find the stuff they left in Disney-esque and family friendly as well. The language in that movie, albeit biblical, wouldn't fly in a PG movie these days. It's quiet easily one of the darkest movies they released after Black Caldron. So, even though I do kinda enjoy it, put me in the "WHY?!" camp.

Pocahontas I openly hate, and mentioned that before. That's an even bigger WHY?! than Hunchback was. I mean, changing the book has been a proud Disney tradition. They tossed out The Jungle Book and made their own movie. Ditto Roger Rabbit, but with the interesting twist that the original author even felt it was superior to his version and even made the sequel to his book a direct sequel to the movie instead. But now you're messing up history. Now, revisionist history in movies is fun, IF the movies don't take themselves seriously. I LOVE Inglorious Basterds, and I love the show Histeria. But Disney tried to use sort of history to A) make Oscar bait and B) make a film about racial tolerance that fails on every level. The Native American tribe is unapologetically warmongering, but played off as righteous in their anger because the white settlers are all goofy idiots lead by a completely invented character that's a complete monster. Hilarious in hindsight when the tolerant white settler is played by Mel "Jews cause all wars" Gibson (though I still like him in Lethal Weapon and Chicken Run).

Even though I enjoy it, I think the second Night of the Museum movie gets more credit than it deserves. Why, you may ask? Because people actually think of it as a good movie; I just like it because I think it's hilariously bad. Maybe if it didn't make half the historical figures in it look like buffoons, and had an actually scary villain instead of an over-acting sissy (no offense to Hank Azaria, because he's awesome), it could have been legitimately good, but it's not.

There are only 2 reasons I saw that movie in theaters...

Film may have been meh, but that was one of the most epic things I've ever seen on the big screen.

 

[D'Snowth]

I pretty much agree with Drtooth on Hunchback, I think that was probably one of the first "dark" movies I ever saw... I wouldn't say it's entirely sugar coated either, not only for the reasons Drtooth already mentioned regarding Frollo and his ungodly obsession with Esmeralda, but at least he too died as well, in a somewhat stylized way: the gargoyle perch suddenly giving him an evil smile, breaking off, plummeting both of them to the fires below. Sure, there were a lot of lighthearted moments throughout, and the Gargoyles did steal the show (come to think of it, why didn't THEY get a weekly series, like Timon and Pumbaa did?), but most things considered, yeah, it was pretty dark for a Disney movie.

Ironically, I was OBSESSED with this movie when it came out... I must have seen it in the theaters at least six times (back when movies weren't in theaters for just a month), and when it finally came out on VHS, I probably watched that thing everyday for MONTHS. I even recall having a playset of the Notre Dame Cathedral with figures of Quasi, the Gargoyles, Clopin, various little accessories, etc. I guess even as a dumb little kid, I liked stories that had much subtext to it, compared to what most kiddie shows or movies are like.

 

[Drtooth]

It's not that I dislike the movie. I really like it, actually... but I just don't see why they said "this will make a wonderful movie. This scene where Frollo is about to kill Quasimodo will look GREAT on a Burger King collector's glass."

It makes you wonder what was on the list of considered films that didn't make the cut. I know the original version of Hercules was more action oriented and far less self-satirical. I'm very mixed about it, since I really like the finished project. Other than that, you wonder what concept was pushed aside for Hunchback.

 

[jvcarroll]

I like Rover Dangerfield. It's a huge mess of a film, but with funny bits and beautiful animation.

There's a lot of very popular Asian animation projects (not going to names here because I will be flamed) without any fluidity of motion, quality frame rate or intelligible story. Some even win awards. I just don't get it. Give me Rover over that puffed-up self-indulgence any day! However, films like "The Illusionist" and the "Triplets of Belleville" are gorgeous, amusing and have quality linear narratives. That's the foreign animation I like.

I never really connected with Disney films after the Lion King. Pocahontas, Hunchback and Atlantis just didn't do much for me. One of the most underrated films is Treasure Planet. It's thoroughly enjoyable. Again, it's not perfect, but it's my second favorite Treasure Island after the Muppets! If you haven't seen it, check it out!

 

[D'Snowth]

I like Rover Dangerfield. It's a huge mess of a film, but with funny bits and beautiful animation.

That's pretty much how I felt about it. And I guess too, in a sense, it also helps to be a fan of Rodney Dangerfield... but then again, I'm not too sure many little kids who were seeing this movie were even really familiar with him to begin with (similar with Bee Movie, I doubt many kids were really familiar with Jerry Seinfeld).

 

[Drtooth]

I never really connected with Disney films after the Lion King. Pocahontas, Hunchback and Atlantis just didn't do much for me. One of the most underrated films is Treasure Planet. It's thoroughly enjoyable. Again, it's not perfect, but it's my second favorite Treasure Island after the Muppets! If you haven't seen it, check it out!

I tried to watch treasure Planet when it was on TV once... just didn't do much for me at all. Atlantis was a misfire of trying to get out of the Princess niche that Disney was forced into, but Treasure Planet just tried way too hard with itself. I think Disney really should have tried more original stories at that point. Lilo and Stitch rewarded them greatly... 3 DTV sequels, a TV series and 2 Japanese exclusive series. No Disney franchise ever did that. Too bad the last original story they tried in 2-D was Home on the Range. They went a little too crazy on that one. it was like Gary Busey crazy, not quirky fun crazy.

 

[jvcarroll]

That's pretty much how I felt about it. And I guess too, in a sense, it also helps to be a fan of Rodney Dangerfield... but then again, I'm not too sure many little kids who were seeing this movie were even really familiar with him to begin with (similar with Bee Movie, I doubt many kids were really familiar with Jerry Seinfeld).

Reanimating a dead, floppy-necked turkey is a win in my book. That's my favorite bit, but

I tried to watch treasure Planet when it was on TV once... just didn't do much for me at all. Atlantis was a misfire of trying to get out of the Princess niche that Disney was forced into, but Treasure Planet just tried way too hard with itself. I think Disney really should have tried more original stories at that point. Lilo and Stitch rewarded them greatly... 3 DTV sequels, a TV series and 2 Japanese exclusive series. No Disney franchise ever did that. Too bad the last original story they tried in 2-D was Home on the Range. They went a little too crazy on that one. it was like Gary Busey crazy, not quirky fun crazy.

I think all animated films try hard to break boundaries so I won't accuse any of them for "trying too hard" in any sense. There was a missing layer of development in Planet. Something at the core of it that didn't propel it further like it should have. I think they should have gone darker, but there's some story element that seemed missing. The rest is really stunning. I wouldn't recommend watching any film for the first time on television with commercial breaks. That is not a fair chance.