MovieChat Forums > Fight Club (1999) Discussion > Truly most overated film of all time.

Truly most overated film of all time.


I have seen it three times trying desperately to figure out what makes this film so special but i just reached the conclusion that Fight Club is the most overhyped and overated film of all times since for some reason it is included in the top ten films in imdb.

I understand that everything is a matter of taste but i believe that if it wasnt for Brad Pitt and Edward Norton on the cover (although their acting in the film is both average to say the least) then this movie wouldnt be rated more than 7.5 at best.

Its one of David Fincher's weakest works and i cant believe its rated higher than Seven, The Social Network, Gone Girl and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

I even found Panic Room and The Game more interesting than Fight Club even they are both preety average films.

I personally gave it a 6/10 and got rid of my original dvd copy.

reply

OK. You've expressed your opinions. Overhyped, overated (sic), weakest, can't believe its(sic) rated higher than..., 6/10.

Now. WHY do you believe what you do? We, the readers you hope to reach with your post, don't know you or why we should give two runny *beep* about your opinion on a 16 year-old movie that 1.1 million have collectively rated at 8.9, and still has one of the most active discussion boards on imdb.com.

This is how to make a cogent OP, please work with this in the future.

1) state your opinion
2) state WHY you hold the opinion
3) give EXAMPLES of WHY you hold the opinion
4) restate your opinion and close

reply

Actually you have a point in your post JayCeezy.

So in my humble opinion i found the scenario too surreal and a little bit confusing at some points, especially in the last 30 minutes of the film where the whole thing got even a little pompous.

The overall acting was average to say the least, although i got to admit Edward Norton had some good moments especially when he beats the *beep* out of himself in his boss office.

The dialogue tried to be funny but it wasnt most of the time and last but not least i found the direction a little bit gloomy for that kind of film, i mean gloomy atmosphere was appropriate for a film like Seven (by the same director) but it was to much for Fight Club for no special reason.

I watched the film three times trying hard to understand why so many people like it but i just couldnt so i consider it a very average film, not even a good one for my taste.

By the way good films dont age so easily (a 15 year old film isnt even considered an old film if you ask me) and as about ratings, well sometimes its interesting to see who rates what and how high, i mean The Dark Knight a Batman film has almost 1.5 million votes and is considered fourth best film of all times in this website so go figure out.....

reply

Sorry but your points are quite frankly awful

At which points did you get confused at? That may be an issue with your attention span, nothing to do with how the film was portrayed.

You're seriously asking why the film was made to look gloomy? Really? It completely reflects the entire nihilistic nature of Durden's philosophy and the film in general.

Who watches a film they don't like three times in order to prove something? I'm calling *beep* on that one.

Fight Club is widely considered to be one of the greatest films of all time. Not just by the general public but by critics too.

reply

"Fight Club is widely considered to be one of the greatest films of all time. Not just by the general public but by critics too."

Really? Can you point me to a considerable number of those critics?

reply

Faster if YOU point US to the critics who DON'T.

reply

If you are the ones making the claim, then you are the ones who should back it up. The claim is:

"Fight Club is widely considered to be one of the greatest films of all time. [...] by critics too".

That means that a majority number of critics consider it not only a good movie, or a great movie, but ONE OF THE GREATEST FILMS OF ALL TIME. If that is widely considered by critics, then you can surely back up your claim by pointing out a considerable number of those critics. But I'll accept your challenge.

Considering Metacritic's 66/100 metascore, and Rotten Tomatoes' 7.4/10 average rating (with an 80% tomatometer), I'd say most critics consider it a good movie, but it is debatable if they actually consider it a GREAT movie, much less ONE OF THE GREATEST MOVIES OF ALL TIME. Fight Club also doesn't appear in AFI's list of the best movies ever made, or in the Sight & Sound poll, which was once described by Roger Ebert as "by far the most respected of the countless polls of great movies--the only one most serious movie people take seriously".

So, again, where is your proof that Fight Club is widely considered by critics as one of the greatest films of all time? I know a lot of people consider it one of the greatest, judging by its imdb score, but that has nothing to do with the critics' appreciation of the film.

reply

Hahaha! YOU are here to learn. WE already know.

reply

Ok.

reply

"It is what we KNOW ALREADY that often prevents us from learning"
Claude Bernard

reply

Actually it is what we know already (our previous knowledge and cognitive structures) that makes it possible for us, as knowing subjects, to learn new, more complex things, as proven by almost 100 years of comprehensive development and learning paradigms (read Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, David Ausubel, Jerome Bruner, Frida Diaz-Barriga, Diane E. Papalia, and literally every single author that has something to say about modern psychology or education, without exception). But yeah, I know what you mean (I think so). Anyway, Fight Club is one of my favorite movies, I just don't agree with the idea that it is considered "one of the greatest movies" by critics.

reply

you lost that debate by a wide margin.

reply

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens

reply

exactly. apply that to all your posts so far.

reply

You mean like claiming that Fight Club is widely considered one of the greatest movies of all time by critics?

reply

Fight Club is widely considered to be one of the greatest films of all time. Not just by the general public but by critics too.


Don't Michael Moore this discussion, and intentionally use an incomplete quote.

Fight Club is #10 out of all movies on imdb.com, as of this writing holding a cumulative 8.9 rating from over 1.3 million voters. Read that again. As for critics (that is plural), I'm sure you can find two that love it, here at this link... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0137523/externalreviews?ref_=tt_ql_op_5 Again, you flyspeck in vain, have been weight, measured, and found wanting. Better luck on the Transformers board.

reply

The point that the general public thinks that Fight Club is one of the greatest films of all time was never in question. The particular point that was in question is that, among critics, it is also widely considered to be one of the greatest films of all time. It isn't, as I proved in another comment. If by "widely considered to be one of the greatest" you mean two critics, then you are just deluded. You are also plain stupid, as proven by every single post of yours.

reply

It must be hard to lose, even harder when you do it without grace.

reply

Considering that now you are just trolling, I don't think there's any reason to continue this conversation. Obviously you know that you were talking out of your ass, but you won't accept it because that's what ignorant stupid people tend to do.

reply

Have a nice day!😭

reply

1.2 million votes on IMDB with a score of 8.9 speaks volumes about this film. Literally impossible for haters or fanboys to skew the result either way so in essence it is a fairly accurate representation of a general consensus.

reply

This kid basically just said, "I didn't get it. So it's overhyped"

reply

Kid? More like a vegetable!

reply

JayCeezy: Why are you taking it so personally that not everyone likes what you like? Everyone has their own tastes in movies. If you really get that upset over strangers not agreeing with you, then you need help for a much deeper issue.

reply

Are you OP's teacher or something? State opinion and explain why? Is he taking an exam for you?

reply

I understand that everything is a matter of taste

Well actually a lot of the rating isn't even down to taste. It has near perfect production quality earning it a near perfect score (around 8-9/10). Then given the amount of people that personally enjoy the movie, bumps it too around 9-10/10 total. Right where it's landed on the top 250.

reply

[deleted]

So what you've basically illustrated to everyone here it that you didn't understand the various themes of the film at all?

reply

Another troll making a generalization. Hahaha. Whining malcontent.

This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

reply

After I saw it about 3 times, it lost it's luster, even though its predictable on 1st Watch(When I say Predictable, Im talking about TYLER)... There are plenty of redeemable qualities. Norton and Pitt are definitely stars in this. Its clever, I enjoy the music etc... BUT, it's nowhere near 14 on my list. I agree in the most basic, general sense. It's in my Top... Idk, maybe 100. If I really sat back and listed better films it might make 100. Its a solid 8/10

reply

Its actually #10... Wow. Nah... Not even close

reply

Yeah, after you have been to Hawaii three times, or met the President three times, or heard your favorite song three times, etc., those experiences also "lose their luster." btw, who watches a movie three times that they think is mediocre?

reply

Mediocre is 8/10? Since when?

GREAT films have redeemable qualities. O can watch Goodfellas, Taxi Driver, The Shining, Pulp Fiction and any other number of my Top films over and over. I watch my favorites as often as I listen to great music. This film is really good, ALMOST great. It just doesn't pull me in like others do... And to go along with the OP, #10 is extremely high. That's just how I feel. I watched it today, came on the board and agree with this post on its most basic level. I don't think its a 4/10, however, I find it to be overrated ON HERE.

reply

And hearing my favorite album NEVER loses its luster, nor does going to Paradise... Terrible analogy.

reply

I can only presume that the OP feels the same way about Fight Club as I do about The Green Mile.

reply

Greatest movie ever made.

It's ok to disagree, but to think the cover art has ANYTHING to do with it's ranking is just stupid.

I hope they re-release this in theaters in 2019, I hated Pitt when this came out and the marketing for it sucked. When I popped in that VHS copy I was blown away.
And I've watched it even more times than Full Metal Jacket!


HELP AGGRAVATE THE STATUS QUO, VOTE AGAINST EVERY INCUMBENT YOU SEE ON A BALLOT.

reply

Agree. It's hugely overrated by users here. It only has 66 on meta critic and 80 on rt even though 80 is still to high imo. The film is just boring plain and simple.

reply

Over 1 million imdb.com users disagree with your opinion (which you didn't bother to support). Could it be that you overrate the value of your own opinion? Think about it.

reply

And talking about critics reviews on the film i am quoting this from Wikipedia...

Janet Maslin, reviewing for The New York Times, praised Fincher's direction and editing of the film. She wrote that Fight Club carried a message of "contemporary manhood", and that, if not watched closely, the film could be misconstrued as an endorsement of violence and nihilism.[79] Roger Ebert, reviewing for the Chicago Sun-Times, called Fight Club "visceral and hard-edged", and "a thrill ride masquerading as philosophy" that most audiences would not appreciate.[80] Ebert later acknowledged that the film was "beloved by most, not by me".[81] Jay Carr of The Boston Globe opined that the film began with an "invigoratingly nervy and imaginative buzz", but that it eventually became "explosively silly".[82] Newsweek‍ '​s David Ansen described Fight Club as "an outrageous mixture of brilliant technique, puerile philosophizing, trenchant satire and sensory overload" and thought that the ending was too pretentious.[83] Richard Schickel of Time described the director's mise en scène as dark and damp: "It enforces the contrast between the sterilities of his characters' aboveground life and their underground one. Water, even when it's polluted, is the source of life; blood, even when it's carelessly spilled, is the symbol of life being fully lived. To put his point simply: it's better to be wet than dry." Schickel applauded the performances of Brad Pitt and Edward Norton, but he criticized the film's "conventionally gimmicky" unfolding and the failure to make Helena Bonham Carter's character interesting.

Well it seems i am not the only one that found this film pretentious and unecesserily complex.

reply

...and you are?

reply

The person who started this topic in which you decided to participate.

reply

...ah yes, the one who gave it a 6/10 and claimed to watch it three times and is now telling 1 million plus imdb raters that they are wrong in evaluating a 16 year-old movie. How have you fared thus far?

reply

Judging by the number of your posts trying to defend the film and your own opinion i would say that i am doing preety well, thanks for asking :)

reply

Good to know! Please let us know your thoughts upon your fourth viewing!

reply

I actually got rid of my original dvd so i dont think i will be seeing this film ever again, thanks for your interest though on my opinion ;)

reply

I truly hope you haven't been yearning for that DVD again, after a month of being without it. It seems, due to your obsession with this thread, that you've been salivating over a 4th viewing. Please refrain from eating soap in its absence. Yours, concerned imdb community.

reply

The film received very mixed reviews at the time it came out and was quite controversial. It was a love it or hate it kind of movie, with most hatred coming from the fact it was pretty violent (although I don't really understand why you'd hate a movie for that). The reason it has grown in esteem over time is because once the controversy died down and all the crybabies shut up about it, it's themes and messages began to be appreciated more. The most prominent theme would be rebellion in a society of conformism, an issue that was highlighted very well throughout the film and one that young people can identify with.

To people who have conformed all their lives, this film is mind-blowing. To people who hate conforming to rules and expectations, the film provides an escape, a dream of some day radically changing society.

This film is the one film I have watched that has changed my life and, because of it's underlying themes and ideas, I don't think it's overrated. One's inability to understand or see what's truly going in doesn't mean something is "unecesserily complex".

reply

I just saw it after 10 years and I have to say I agree with you. I think FC caters to young people, in much the same way Palahniuk novels do. I watched it as a young 16-year-old movie lover and it blew my mind in a way no other film did. My friends and I left the cinema to have a drink - it was a very quiet one. No one had words for what we'd just seen. It was new and exciting and felt like nothing else that came before it.
I don't think I'd have the same reaction watching it for the first time now. Over time we grew more cynical, watched and experienced more, and the internet's bombarding us by edgy ideas all the time. But watching Fight Club again, although I find it a lot more naive now (still narratively impressive though), felt like therapy.

reply

[deleted]

Agree. It's hugely overrated by users here. It only has 66 on meta critic and 80 on rt even though 80 is still to high imo. The film is just boring plain and simple.


So to sum it up; IMDB ratings are done by late generation x'sers and millenials... The high number of sci fi films for instance confirms this on top 250. Check out City of God, sixth sense and other films from 1999-2002 that got insanely high ranking on IMDB, it is because of the year it was released, we are now seeing the aggregate of a lot of internet-active people ranking them.

See Leon and Se7en for two other ordinary films that is rated ridiculously high (top 250 of all time!?) for the same effect 1994-95.

The people who saw it in 1999 and was impressed by its shock value and plot twist, and a few other things like signature scenes (norton beating himself up in the boss office) Brad Pitt was BIG then etc, is now the biggest group on IMDB. Thats why it has so many ratings, and most of them good. The people who didnt like Fight Club (like me) usually dont bother to go vote it down.

I can see Fight Club being on someones top 100 list of all times etc, but top 10 on IMDB is a bit of a mystery to me; its not even very high on RT, or was THAT well received in its time. I can only interpet it as a cult film with wide appeal. Kind of like Blade Runner, which I love, but can totally understand other people finding boring.

reply