Bedrockgames
I post in the voice of Christopher Walken
This is actually the first I have heard of these (we had a local dive bar named the Pickled Onion but I thought it was a joke)
Overrated/Underrated Geek Media
- Thread starter Mercurius
- Start date
This is actually the first I have heard of these (we had a local dive bar named the Pickled Onion but I thought it was a joke)
Bedrockgames
I post in the voice of Christopher Walken
I am almost reluctant to turn books into an underrated or overrated contest. But I think history books are often underrated. And genre fiction can often be underrated
Clint_L
Legend
Sure. 100%. Art is subjective.
And a subjective opinion that is based on little knowledge or rigour is, to me, very uninteresting.
I teach literature, among other subjects. I'm pretty expert at it, with years of experience, multiple degrees, etc. (I also teach film, to a lesser degree, but I am far from an expert). If I say a book is great, does that make my opinion any more valid than my student who hates reading and barely slogged their way through because it was required (or, let's face it, might have just read a summary online)?
Well, on a personal level, no. Not for that kid. They like what they like.
But at the level of shared knowledge...yeah. My opinion is more meaningful than theirs. If they have no knowledge or interest in the book in the wider context of literature, no interest or understanding in the various tools and techniques that authors use to create that art, no ability or perseverance to analyze theme, story arc, etc., then their opinion, while valid as personal knowledge, is pretty uninteresting as shared knowledge (trust me on this; I have to mark their papers).
I can't tell you how many times, in my now long career, I have had a teenager tell me that Shakespeare is overrated. As it happens, I tend to agree. And I love Shakespeare, but I have also studied Elizabethan literature in graduate school. I have a lot of experience and context behind my opinion. But that student, who has (barely) read one or two plays, maybe watched a film adaptation, and doesn't understand more than 10% of the context or language, has not earned their opinion. They don't know what they are talking about. They can't justify it at anything beyond a personal level. Which is fine...at a personal level. And also profoundly uninteresting.
Anyone can have an opinion about anything. And that is wonderful. It's good to have opinions. And it is also often good to keep them to yourself when you lack knowledge and understanding. Or to put out the effort and earn the respect of those who have done so.
A good film critic who is dedicated to their craft, like any skilled person who is dedicated to their craft, enriches us. To me, their opinions matter more at the level of shared discourse. Because they know more than I do, and can point out things I might have missed, complexities I never considered, connections I didn't see. I can't say that makes them more "right," because art is subjective. And lots of time, I'll disagree with a particular review. Ultimately, how a film makes you feel is what matters most, and if you love it, you love it. My less informed opinion is still valid, for me. But I'm not adding a lot to the conversation.
So someone who hasn't seen a ton of movies and doesn't know much about film is very much entitled to their opinion, and their opinion is valid. But it's probably not super enlightening.
Edit: One way that I think the Internet has immeasurably harmed public discourse is by enabling a lot of people to think that their largely uninformed opinions are as meaningful as expert opinions. In the arts, this isn't a disaster, it's just tedious. But in the sciences, it's a disaster.
Last edited:
Bedrockgames
I post in the voice of Christopher Walken
What I am saying is one being an expert doesn't automatically make them right about things. I am not saying there isn't value in learning about the history of a given medium or being an expert in a given field. But just like anything else, there are bad experts. And good experts can be wrong (or use their expertise to make their opinion sound like a fact). People who have seen a lot of movies but aren't professionals can also be right sometimes. And people are always right about their own taste in a thing.
I am not saying fan generated conversations are the same as academic ones or ones taking place in papers. But I also think they have tremendous value. I know I have gotten a lot out of what are essentially amateur reviews of niche genres by passionate fans (often much more than I get out of reviews that are better written and in published books). But I am not saying people shouldn't teach literature or that experts aren't important.
Obviously a person who has never read much of anything saying they think Shakespeare is overrated is not something people should take very seriously. But I think when there are rifts between the tastes of professional critics or experts in the arts and audiences, then that is something worth looking at and talking about.
At the end of the day though I do think how art makes people feel is the thing that truly matters and we shouldn't undervalue that (and I do think it is worth exploring)
I think there are different kind of movie critics. Obviously someone getting paid to do film criticism should take their job and craft seriously. But there are different levels of criticism, and I think there is value in a lot of the amateur stuff available on line these days. There are academic critics, there are journalist critics and there are critics operating more in the fan-sphere of things. I wouldn't ever argue these aren't different. But I do think it is a mistake to undervalue the fan critics. This came up elsewhere in the thread but there are some genres with deeply passionate fans who who may not have the broader perspective of a professional critic (which is valuable) but bring obsessive fan dedication to the genre and in my experience they often spot things that professional critics miss (they can be wrong too because fan criticisms are a much more casual enterprise with less editorial oversight).
I also think part of what happens is experts and professional critics can lose touch with regular audiences. So I don't think non-experts refraining from weighing in on the conversation is healthy. Art is something that we should all share culturally and be able to freely comment on. You just have to take someone with a grain of salt if they are 18, have only seen 30 movies and start telling you the history of gangster cinema.
Sure but we aren't really talking about that. We are more talking about non-professionals who have seen a lot of movies and read a lot of books (they just might not have an editor or training). I will admit I sometimes also like watching reaction videos, which are usually people who haven't seen that many movies. But I find that helpful too because it can be useful to see what kind of reaction people have to a movie when they aren't as familiar with the genre or style
I doubt we can go here without getting into politics, but I intentionally drew a distinction between opinions about John Wick movies, and opinions about things like gravity. The stake's are just so much different (and I think the arts isn't something that should be cloistered away and only discussed publicly by professionals)
Bedrockgames
I post in the voice of Christopher Walken
I am just personally very interested in other peoples reactions to things. So while I will often look for reviews by people who know what they are talking about, I will also look for people who are essentially just talking (and often saying a lot of factually wrong things but occasionally making interesting points). As an example, I read Frankenstein again last year which I have mentioned. And after I did, the first thing I looked up were lectures and essays by professional academics. And because I read the 1818 edition, I looked up academic resources on the difference between editions. But then I also took a look at some of the reviews on youtube by people who had simply read the book. Some understood the tradition it was written in and some just liked horror. I found getting all these perspectives valuable. It was also just nice seeing the conversation around this book. When I re-read Hamlet I did something similar (i.e. looking up differences between editions, academic explanations of the meaning, I also watched every version of Hamlet I could find on streaming, but then I wanted to see what people on YouTube had to say.
With niche genres of film, I think it can be very handy to get a wide range of opinions. Obviously the more someone has seen from a genre, the more weight I will give their opinion (especially if they are listing off facts or something). I know people for example, just in life, who have no academic or professional background in films, but are movie buffs who have seen everything under the sun. They usually have pretty insightful thoughts. And they can often make comparisons between films that few other people could make because most people simply haven't seen as many movies as they have.
John R Davis
Hero
Overrated: Firefly (and WHFRP)
Underrated: Equilibrium (and Talisman Adventures RPG)
Underrated: Equilibrium (and Talisman Adventures RPG)
Ryujin
Legend
"Equilibrium" likely isn't as underrated, as it's relatively unknown. That's a shame because it's a great movie, with a good message.
Paul Farquhar
Legend
I’ve just been reminded of this one:
Underrated: The Nutcracker and the Four Realms (Disney).
Underrated: The Nutcracker and the Four Realms (Disney).
Bedrockgames
I post in the voice of Christopher Walken
Underated: Lifeforce. For me this movie had it all, but audiences and critics never really seemed that enthusiastic about it
Ryujin
Legend
I think that it's currently still available on Tubi. They've listed it as "leaving soon" a couple of times, but I guess it gets enough new viewers that they keep it around.
(I originally saw it in a theatre and had no idea who Patrick Stewart was, because it was just pre-TNG.)
Similar Threads
