MovieChat Forums > Being John Malkovich (1999) Discussion > Highly Overrated

Highly Overrated

posted 15 years ago by chironaphelion
51 replies | jump to latest

I rarely feel compelled to comment on a film and even more infrequently actually comment. This is partly due to the rather spiteful and shallow critiques offered up as counter comments to those who have an opposing view and partly because my views are generally well represented in the existing threads. Here, however, the threads for this film read like a fan club...

The critics loved the film as it seems so do the voters of IMDb. It certainly was original and the two Johns played their parts very well. However, I found it sophomoric and over the top. The characters played by Cameron Diaz and by Catherine Keener were completely unbelievable in their actions. The entirety of the 7 ½ floor, the low ceilings, the elevator, the portal's unexplained origins, the "clients" in queue, etc. was laughable. With the other arbitrary events and the serendipity, I came to believe the joke was on the film's viewers.

I liked the originality and even the irony of the farce played on us, the audience. However, the film did not amuse me; the feeling was more of disgust for the characters and of the underlying themes. Without the originality (I thought Wristcutters was just as or even more original) and the realization that the joke is on the audience, this film would have nothing going for it; for even solid performances by the two Johns cannot carry this film.

In summary, I expected so much and I found so little to like. It certainly is not horrible or even bad, just not great and wonderful, as many of the others here at IMDb have found it to be.

[–] converge3 15 years ago

Well, I found it to be great and wonderful. It put a giant smile on my face and kept me intrigued and laughing throughout. Awesomely original, entertaining, and hilarious.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] creaturefeeture 14 years ago

Transformers 2 was so god awful.

Voting Hist.http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=26598711

[–] howie99 15 years ago

it's not a suppose to be a serious film and believable... it's a comedy.

[–] SIRTRUMP43 15 years ago

and to add on to watch howie99 said, it's a fantasy.

It's the idea that people are not pleased with their own bodies and despise the success of others.

[–] tommcgahon 15 years ago

reading way too much into this i without actually appreciating it??
How can you comment and say that this film is bad yet actually speaking as if you're putting forward valid points against the movie when you're just talkin nonsense??
Take a step back, admit you're a fool and you may be forgiven!

[–] Emil_egg 15 years ago

I wonder why "chironaphelion" has not responded?

Obvious troll is obvious...

[–] chironaphelion 15 years ago

If you really must know, I have not responded before now because I was immensely amused by reading all of these "counter comments." The comments more or less proved my point so silence was the correct response.

To those who believe that I criticized it because I did not understand it or the genre I can only saw that you are so very wrong. I never said the film was bad just that it was overrated, which it is.

As a final note, if sufficiently motivated, you can read all of the previous posts of any poster and silently pass judgment. How some users love to see their typed words...

[–] anela_greendayever 12 years ago

chironaphelion I agree with you completely :)

[–] PatrickArchangel 10 years ago

I have to disagree with you about one thing... This movie is not overrated. It is just garbage.

[–] Erniesam 10 years ago

Now I think you are a bit harsh. Still, that is your opinion of course.

I agree with the poster of this thread: this movie is overrated. Perhaps my expectations were too high after having watched Adaptation which I found charming and witty and indeed poignant. This movie however left me completely uninterested. As a comedy I could not find any justification and as a more profound allegory...well, let's just say I was so annoyed with the pretentiousness and forceful originality that I did not notice that.

The idea is nice but what has been done with it I find uninteresting and boring. The whole movie thrives on this idea of "becoming someone else" and "15 minutes of fame" but it never touches upon realy interesting points or conclusions. To speak some famous words: much ado about nothing.

[–] wylierichardson-966-922691 8 years ago

I think you may mean "are jealous of others' success". But is 'escapism' really the dominant theme here? If the premise is a paranormal / fantasy concept, then it needs to go deep - deeper than the film-makers did here. For example, two of the main characters seem to be using the JM 'portal' merely to establish a sexual connection. Nothing wrong with wanting to have an affair, of course, but most people manage to establish those WITHOUT using a 'third party' as a go-between!

This movie would have worked more if there had been a clear RESULT of the JM portal being available to others - and not just of the financial possibilities. What if JM faced some sort of danger or crisis, and then the 'users' faced the same trouble? What if the portal itself had some sort of hidden trap - like 'its harder to get out of the portal then it seems'? It's an interesting premise, but mishandled here.

[–] information_police 15 years ago

The characters played by Cameron Diaz and by Catherine Keener were completely unbelievable in their actions. The entirety of the 7 ½ floor, the low ceilings, the elevator, the portal's unexplained origins, the "clients" in queue, etc. was laughable.

So, why were you trying so hard to believe?

What is your objection to laughter?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] seaniesharko 15 years ago

Err maybe because the film is of the fantasy genre... Last time I checked, fantasy was not supposed to be based in reality...

[–] robbie_stanleysmith 15 years ago

that's a vacuous thing to say. of course fantasy is based in reality, its an extension of reality. the original poster was complaining that the two female leads were unbelievable and unconvincing in their actions. i agree. in a sci-fi film, one accepts the aspects of the film which dont exist in real life because they are consistent and follow rules and could conceivably exist. the females were unconvincing in their actions as human beings. (SPOILERS) there's no way maxine would've had a child and become a couple with lottie; maxine was clearly a cold-hearted and manipulative woman who used john malkovich and betrayed both craig and lottie. that's just unconvincing screenplay, not fantasy.

[–] Asmodeus_10 15 years ago

The movie jumps forward 8 months during Maxine's pregnancy. The documentary that John is watching when the story picks up again says that Maxine's behavior had changed dramatically as her pregnancy advanced. She was definitely cold-hearted and manipulative when they started their scheme, but realizing she was pregnant with Lotte's child and carrying it for 8 months could have turned her into a different person. Skipping forward 8 months just didn't allow the viewer to see those changes taking place.

Although I agree to an extent about Lotte's actions being unrealistic. Her experience in Malkovich's mind would have had to have been much stronger than the other characters' in order to explain her behavior.

[–] jrrhhm 15 years ago

I respect that you did not enjoy the film, however I do have a comment. The unexplained themes only make sense as unexplained. Explaining every detail would take away from the surrealist elements, and make the film more sci-fi or something like that. Everything is supposed to be generally unexplained, it only makes sense. Arbitrary events are all part of that style of writing, which as previously mentioned comes from Beckett and other similar playwrights.

[–] johnmichael-2 15 years ago

Without the originality (I thought Wristcutters was just as or even more original) and the realization that the joke is on the audience, this film would have nothing going for it

This is such a ridiculous thing to say. When are people going to learn that you can't judge a film by pretending part of it doesn't exist? You're like one of the people who said: "Without the Joker, The Dark Knight wouldn't have been such a good movie."

Yeah, and without the shark, "Jaws" wouldn't be such a classic.

Proud member of SHREWS (Society for the Honor Required of Eyes Wide Shut)