Browsing at my old stomping grounds, eFilmCritic (a mirror site for Hollywood B****slap), I saw the first paragraph of David Hollands’ one-star review of “Slumdog Millionaire” and knew I didn’t need to read any further. In just two sentences, Hollands does four things that are at least annoying and possibly flat-out amateurish.
Here’s what he wrote:
When a film garners as much critical praise as “Slumdog Millionaire” has, one assumes watching the movie will be like witnessing the second coming of Christ. When I heard the praise growing, I didn’t join in the chorus; “Slumdog Millionaire” is directed by Danny Boyle, one of the most overrated filmmakers of all time.
Here’s what’s wrong with it:
When a film garners as much critical praise as “Slumdog Millionaire” has, one assumes watching the movie will be like witnessing the second coming of Christ.
If one does assume that, then one is setting oneself up for disappointment. Is Hollands, as a movie critic, saying that he lets himself get so overwhelmed by hype and buzz and publicity that he goes into films with crazily unrealistic expectations? Beware of any critic who does that.
Beware also of any critic who begins a review by talking about what OTHER people thought of the movie. Writing a feature about how a film has been received is one thing. But if it’s a review — and this is stashed in eFilmCritic’s “reviews” section — then it should be the author’s opinion of the movie, not his opinion of other people’s opinions. Why? Because by mentioning the film’s praise right off the bat, Hollands gives the impression that his opinion is a reaction to THAT, and not to the movie itself.
When I heard the praise growing, I didn’t join in the chorus; “Slumdog Millionaire” is directed by Danny Boyle, one of the most overrated filmmakers of all time.
Ah, I see. He knew in advance that he wouldn’t like the film, because he hates Danny Boyle. And what do you know — he saw the film, and he hated it! His prophecy was fulfilled!
Look, if you’ve hated every film by a certain director, that’s fine. I’ve loathed all of Rob Zombie’s efforts, for example. But Hollands makes it sound like he used those prior experiences to pre-judge the new movie. How about mentioning a specific Boyle film or two, with just a phrase or descriptor indicating why you disliked them? Anything to let us know that you’ve arrived at your anti-Boyle stance legitimately, case-by-case, and not out of some blind, irrational bias.
Finally, there’s that word again: “overrated.” Saying that Danny Boyle is an “overrated” director tells us nothing. All it really means is that other people like him more than you do. Well, OK — so what?
But “overrated” is used as a way of saying more than that, and this is why it bugs me. When people say something is “overrated,” what they mean is this: “The amount I liked this thing is exactly the right amount to like it. I am the baseline. If you liked it more than I did, then you have erred.” And that’s obnoxious and presumptuous. Beware of any critic who uses the word “overrated.”
(Full disclosure, and to save you the trouble of checking: I have used the word “overrated” three times in movie reviews, twice in 2000 and once in 2001, in reference to “Fargo,” “The Cider House Rules,” and “Donnie Darko.” You should have bewared — bewore? — of me then, too. If I were expressing those sentiments today, I would do a better job of it.)
But some movies are overrated. Boyle’s own ‘Millions’ and more recently, ‘Wall-E’ for two examples, got more critical praise than they deserved. Oh, and ‘Coraline’, as well. Generally, it’s the critics who get it wrong.
I love bewore….when can I use this next?
Ray: [facepalm]
“The amount I liked this thing is exactly the right amount to like it. I am the baseline. If you liked it more than I did, then you have erred.”
I happen to be the only one that this statement applies to. My opinion is fact and everybody else has opinions. Life is so much better for everybody when they come to this realization. 🙂
I had a whole comment written and ready to post. Then I decided that it the merits of it would be lost on the intended audience. I will say this …
Ray. Seriously?
Here’s a visual aid for Ray and the other people who think like him:
*Eric’s point* ——————————————————>
[empty air]
[empty air]
[empty air]
*Ray’s head*
Don’t forget about “The Exorcist” Eric. You state that it is overrated in the first sentence of your review.
But in the world of “Best [fill in whatever I’m involved in now] Ever!!!” I think its possible for things to be overrated, if only because everybody always tends to use only the most superlative language to describe every single one of their experiences.
By the way, this blog post was the best ever!!!!
I knew critiquing films was hard, but I had no idea it was such a complicated ordeal. Glad it’s you and not me.
I just want to say how much I love that picture. Eric, certainly you’re not saying that cat would ever write a bad movie review?!!?!!!?
Eric –
Sincere thanks for your analysis. I find that as I watch more and more and read more and more about movies and films, the more critical I get. Funny, I’ve seen a lot of these types of reviews (especially from amateur reviewers). However, as much as I love the “overrated” line, the best is the desperate attempt at being eloquent, intelligent, and having a sentence that goes for 3-4 lines as an opening sentance in a review.
For example:
“The Dark Knight not only shows the inner struggle between good and evil, but adds fuel to the ever-growing fire of whether man is inherently good (as in the case of our Dark Knight, encompassing the complexity of “right”) versus chaos (as exemplified by Heath Ledger’s ground-breaking performance of the psychotic-yet-brilliant Joker)”
Huh? You couldn’t simplify? You needed an overly complex sentence with big words to give you credibility?
I also agree with Jacob – we’re too quick to label a movie as “the best [insert genre here] movie ever!” and when a movie fails to live to that expectation, it’s dubbed as a flop.
I could go on, but that should be enough fodder.
I am shocked and appalled (remember the good ol’ BYU days and letters to the editor?) not about the main point of your piece, which I enjoyed, but that you used the term overrated in relation to “The Cider House Rules”! In this case, I think I liked this movie the most of anyone in the world, and my opinion is the baseline beneath which everyone else’s falls. Well, or I like the movie and my mom and uncle grew up with the book author, Irving, and overreaction is just more funny. But it does make me think I should look up your review and put the term in context. How hard is it to find old reviews on your inter-blog-url, dag-nabit?
I gave a negative review of “Slumdog Millionaire”. Unlike David Holland, I gave specific examples about why the film was flawed.
I would admit that I did start the film review about the positive response by others critics and the American public, but I gave an argument about why it’s not the best movie ever in the history of cinema.
When I hated a movie, I will dissect it to show how bad it is.
So how can the word “overrated” be used properly?
Overrated I think best applies to those individuals who have a limited knowledge on a subject, particularly if their knowledge revolves around one film or film series. For example, “Twilight is the BEST vampire film ever!” is usually said by those who’ve only watched Twilight and/or maybe one or two other vampire movies after seeing Twilight. IF these people make up a sizable portion of the ratings for a film, I would say it is overrated.
I think Eric makes many good points in this. I will say that a critic or anyone should not judge a film based on what everyone else says. We all fall victim to getting our hopes a little to high when a movie gets such high praise. Many times, it is a let down but a critic has to be extra careful to not let that influence their review. I will say that I disagree about Eric disliking the word overrated. That’s a valid opinion for anyone to have. I’m sure we can find many movies that Eric reviewed that he gave a C or C+ that have gotten high praise from many other critcs (award nominations etc.). Then, Eric would have to agree that he thinks that movie is overrated.
I’m sure we can find many movies that Eric reviewed that he gave a C or C+ that have gotten high praise from many other critcs (award nominations etc.). Then, Eric would have to agree that he thinks that movie is overrated.
No, Eric would not. What Eric would think is, “I guess those people liked that movie more than I did.” Eric would not say it was “overrated” because that would be implying that Eric’s opinion was the “correct” one and everyone else overdid it. Eric would just figure the movie worked better for those people than it did for him, and hey, more power to ’em. Eric thought he made it pretty clear what he thought was wrong, philosophically, with the notion of “overratedness” — i.e., that it’s presumptuous, narcissistic, and obnoxious — but apparently not.
P.S. To clarify another matter, I didn’t call “Cider House Rules” overrated in my review of it, but in my review of “Chocolat.” Likewise, my reference to “Fargo” was in my “O Brother Where Art Thou?” review. You can search for “overrated” to find all the instances on this site where I or a commenter used it.
Ken –
Overrated might be best used when quantitative consensus is defied. An ideal example would be found in sports. Within college sports of all types you have rankings that are voted on by some body, and they are held as the definitive ranking. When a team of lesser rank defeats one of greater, it may be appropriate to call that greater team overrated. When a team consistantly loses to those of lesser rank, the constant losers are clearly overrated. For example, see this year’s University of Utah football team. Their ranking, or lack thereof, is evidence that they were underrated to for much of the season. Overrating in sports is often due to a failure to realize that past performance is no guarantee of future results. So, when Michigan remains ranked for much of a season in which they consistently lose, you could argue that they are overrated.
Within movie conventions, I suppose you could apply the same method if you can determine what is a direct competition and how the rankings should relate to the competition. A movie that performs well with critics but poorly at the box office would not really be overrated as critical reception isn’t a judging of what the take will be. Studios, however, are in the business of making money. If Studio A believes that based on the story B will be a flop while C will be a success, and therefore devotes more resources to C, only to have B outperform C, you can argue that the Y was overrated (but only as far as A was concerned). Underrated is easier to develop if you think about story D being shopped to studios A, E, F, and G, in order, with all passing under G picks it up. When produced, critical and box office consensus is that D has a wonderful story. There you could argue that A, E, and F all underrated D.
At least, that’s when I would use it. Of course, if discussing personal taste, you may state that a film is overrated, but as pointed out elsewhere, please explain it. The critics and box office may have loved Titanic, but I think it was overrated. I thought the movie was too long drawn out for the story, the acting was wooden, and the characters not believable. But, that is my evaluation of my on. I cannot state that the movie WAS overrated, as everybody has their own opinion. The distinction is recognizing valid opinion versus unsubstantiated fact.
Of course, IANAE (I am not an Eric), so my comments may be overrated.
I love how the critic uses the first two paragraphs to summarize the movie but does not advise against spoilers until the third paragraph.
If flashbacks and non-linear stories give him such a bad headache I would love to read what he thinks about Lost.
I understand what you are saying Eric and opinions aren’t facts. Still, your opinion of a C movie that guy high praise from the majority of critics would still be that it was overrated. You might not call it that, but you are still implying it with your grade. I mean I understand that it’s only an opinion and it is narcissistic to think that your opinion is correct. Still, what’s wrong with having a strong opinion and being shocked by what other critics liked and you didn’t? It is your job to give opinions and why not compare it to others. People use that term in sports, movies, tv shows, politics etc. That doesn’t mean they don’t respect other’s opinions or that they think it is 100 percent fact.
Still, your opinion of a C movie that [got] high praise from the majority of critics would still be that it was overrated. You might not call it that, but you are still implying it with your grade.
No, I am not implying it. All I’m implying with my review is that I liked or disliked the film THIS MUCH and for THESE REASONS. Others’ opinions of the film have nothing to do with it. They co-exist in the same universe but have no bearing on one another. You might be inferring such a comparison from my grade, but I assure you, no such comparison is intended.
As for what’s wrong with being shocked when others disagree with you, I’ll tell you what’s wrong with it: It means you go around being shocked all the time. And it gets old. It turns you into one of those annoying Internet people who express dismay and alarm every time someone has an opinion that’s different from theirs. I prefer the live-and-let-live approach. “Here’s what I thought; if you think differently, well, huzzah for you. Write your own review and tell everyone why.”
That’s not to say I’m not occasionally surprised by other critics’ opinions. Sometimes I’ll love or hate something SO MUCH that I’m taken aback when someone has the opposite view. But my surprise usually takes a more benign form: bemusement, mild befuddlement, etc. It’s not “OMG WHAT’S WRONG WITH YOU?!!?!” You can have a strong opinion yet still be perfectly content in the knowledge that other people feel strongly in the opposite direction.
EDITED TO ADD: To put it another way: If someone rates a movie higher than I did, that doesn’t mean I think he “overrated” it. On the contrary, his rating is exactly right — FOR HIM. It presumably is an accurate reflection of what he thinks of the movie. How it compares to my opinion is irrelevant.
Great points all around.
When I call something “overrated,” I don’t mean to say that my opinion about it is the definitive standard, and that other peoples’ differing opinions are inferior. It’s just a shorthand way for me to explain that I enjoyed it far less than the majority of other people did. Nothing more, nothing less.
By the method of reasoning employed here, it must also be “presumptuous, narcissistic, and obnoxious ” to use the word underappreciated, such as in
“‘The Matador’ was a darkly funny, under-appreciated gem[.]”
-Eric D. Snider, 2007
https://www.ericdsnider.com/movies/the-hunting-party/
Funny!
By the method of reasoning employed here, it must also be “presumptuous, narcissistic, and obnoxious ” to use the word underappreciated,
I guess you could take it that way if you wanted to, but that’s not how people use it. Nor does the method of reasoning employed here mean that the opposite of “overrated” must have the same implications as “overrated.”
“Overrated” is a negative term. “Those people overrated this movie. It’s not as good as they think it is.” It tends to imply that the others aren’t as level-headed as you are, for they have gone overboard in their praise.
“Underrated” and its equivalents (“overlooked,” “under-appreciated,” etc.) are positive. They are meant to be helpful in recommending things to others, while “overrated” is meant to dismiss others’ already-held opinions and is not helpful at all. “This movie is underrated! I wish more people appreciated it!” The implication is often that many people aren’t even familiar with the thing in question, and that they’d probably like it if they were.
Having only attended UVU & not the lofty BYU, I really don’t get into the big words as much as you all. But I do know that when I start to read a review, that is like the one Eric used in this peice, I immediately dismiss it & go to see for myself. I also thinnk that if you can’t be impartial when you review something, whether it is a movie, tv show, or music, then you have no business being a reviewer. Your job is to let me know what worked & what doesn’t in whatever you are reviewing. When your own personal bias comes into play, it doesn’t give me any confidence in your review. Thank goodness I never have to worry about that from Eric…….right?
“When people say something is “overrated,” what they mean is this: “The amount I liked this thing is exactly the right amount to like it. I am the baseline. If you liked it more than I did, then you have erred.” And that’s obnoxious and presumptuous. Beware of any critic who uses the word “overrated.””
Yes, but isn’t that what every critic does, professional or otherwise (otherwise = the rest of us), when they (and we) review movies? Aren’t we saying “the amount that I liked this thing is exactly the right amount to like it?” Isn’t saying “I rate this movie a B+” is saying “this is exactly how good this movie is” and the same as saying “anyone who thinks this movie is better or worse than that has erred?
I know that is oversimplified, but isn’t there some truth to it?
ADDITION:
Ya know, I posted that last comment before reading the comment thread, which is a bad move on my part. I think Eric actually already addressed my comment in this thread, through responses to other comments. And I understand his response and think it’s valid. I should have read further before responding.
Scroll up. 🙂
27 comments already………this blog entry is SO overrated!!!
Eric is alll about naming names lately. Between the Oxford Film Scandal and David Holland, I picture one of those guys sitting on a couch, making a list, and then putting on some lipstick as they daydream.
I agree with the first comment to some degree.
A lot of movies critics say are great, bore me half to death.
Because people seek out a reviewer and choose to read his reviews over another, the reviewer may feel he represents those people and his/her opinion is in fact the correct one. Most reviewers recognize they are expressing their views alone.
The challenge for the person seeking a review is to find someone who is consistent, someone they understand and find entertaining. You don’t have to find a reviewer you agree with. I don’t agree with Eric all the time, BUT I can get an idea whether I would like the movie based on his reviews..either positive or negative.
When I hate a movie eric likes I don’t think it was overrated I think eric and I are different people with different likes and dislikes.
I agree with the sports analogy for overrated…it works best. Overrated for movies doesn’t really work. Over publicized? I don’t know what the real word would be, but it really equates more to the hype surrounding a film instead of the actual reviews of it…
Another concern: The title is “More flaccid visual onanism from Danny Boyle.”
Two points: 1- That is a hilariously pretentious title. 2- Referring to an “onanism” as “flaccid” is equally hilarious. Perhaps this was deliberate, but I can’t imagine what the purpose would be.
A different defense of the word “overrated”: I will sometimes use the word as shorthand when referring to older films, a sort of way of saying “the general consensus was that this movie was good, but I disagree.”
In this sense, it’s the same tone (but opposite) as “underrated.” It’s usually when setting up how I feel about a particular filmmaker or performer, as in: “Eric D. Snider, whose recently hit big with the overrated ‘Underpants of Destiny’…”, which lets me in one word explain how Eric’s previous work compares with my take on his newest movie. (Granted, the majority of such claims are in use of “underrated,” shorthand for “you’re all idiots for never enjoying this guy’s movies before, so here’s another chance you shouldn’t pass up.”)
// When people say something is “overrated,” what they mean is this: “The amount I liked this thing is exactly the right amount to like it. I am the baseline. If you liked it more than I did, then you have erred.” //
Really? cuz I always thought overrated meant “got more praise than it deserves.”
I would guess that for many people who use the word there is an implied “I think” between “than” and “it.”
Just like when I say “that’s a good movie” there’s an implied “I think” in front of it.
Of course I’m using my opinion as a baseline, whose else’s would I be using?
David Manning said earlier that if overrated is obnoxious because it assumes your opinion is THE opinion, then underrated is obnoxious for the same reasons
And I thought Eric’s rebuttal was silly.
I agree that some people use overrated in an obnoxious, snobby way, but I don’t believe that some people misusing it is grounds for dismissing the word.
Overrated is a valuable thing for a reviewer to say because people are aware of the outspoken public opinion, the ‘hype’ I guess. When a movie has tons of great reviews a person might go to their favorite movie reviewer to see if that person agrees with the majority. Then if the reviewer called it ‘overrated’ it would be meaningful to the reader.
There’s a number of movies I think are totally awesome but would still consider overrated due to their ravenous fanbases which, as Jacob pointed out, can get awfully carried away with superlatives.
Oh, and regarding disregard for other peoples opinions (because once I start writing I have trouble stopping)
It’s tons of fun to laugh at the people who think how many stars the dark knight got is “rly srs bznz”
but, if they should be respecting the 4.5-star opinion, shouldn’t you be respecting the it’s-serious-business opinion?
You may use calm and frequently hilarious prose to condemn their opinion rather than by repeatedly commenting “OMGWTF! @$$|-|013! ur stupid” but that’s just because you are more eloquent than they are (because you are a writer and they are sixth graders)
Lots of overreacting in these comments…..
Keep it up Eric, I know exactly what you mean.
And TBH people shouldn’t even care if he defines “overrated” differently from you, because he’s still the best damn film critic out there, all the others are mainstream scrubs.
I just wanted to say that I definitely think that Eric D. Snider is a top notch film critic. He is the only one who can make me laugh while I read a movie review. Plus, I am not the laughing type, so that just goes to show that Eric is cool. Just because he wrote “overrated” a few times in some reviews does not mean that you should write him off as just another schmucky film critic.
P.S. – I don’t know if schmucky is spelled right, or if it is even a word, but whatever. My spelling skills haven’t been good since the invention of the spell check on MS Word – which was before I was born. 🙂
Generally, when I see the word “overrated” I assume that whatever they’re talking about sucks. And when I see the word ‘underrated” I assume that whatever they’re talking about is good. No one ever says that a movie they thought was awful was “underrated”, and I’ve NEVER heard someone say, “X is my favorite movie EVAAAAAAHH!!! But it’s really overrated though; it’s nowhere near as good as IT SO TOTALLY FREAKIN’ IS OHMYGOD YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS MOVIE yeah so it has its good points but it’s really not the best moVIE EVAHHH GUYZ ANY SECOND SPENT NOT SEEING THIS MOVIE IS A WASTE OF OXYGEN COME WATCH THIS OR I WILL EAT YOUR SOUL!!!”