Does it shock you that this film is on our list? Or were you expecting it? Long has this film been touted as a classic, one for the books. But does “Forrest Gump” hold up to today? A number of critics and audience members alike thought that “Forrest Gump” ought to be lumped into the ‘overrated’ pile.

Sure, Tom Hanks provides that star power that makes you marvel at how a loveable goofball ends up crashing every monumental piece of American history. But at its core, the film is staunchly conservative. The film’s continual references to family values and obedience to law and land sometimes make it feel a touch propagandist. Thoughts?

Ah, this one is bound to rile up a few of you! Many people who initially walked out of “Inception” were overwhelmed and somewhat befuddled at the complex (or nonsense?) plot. Christopher Nolan, a Hollywood hard-hitter, will put out a film, and millions swoon, naming him one of the best directors ever. Period.

But there are some things about “Inception,” which, on reflection, is a not-so-great plot that is disguised by a plethora of visual effects. So people say “Woah,” but what did you actually get out of it apart from a few shifting buildings and fall scenes? The film isn’t a total write-off, and you’d hope it wouldn’t be for the huge budget and A-list cast.

You’d think with Beyonce as its lead; this film would be one for the books! Not to mention the stunning vocal prowess of the then-newcomer Jennifer Hudson. Based on the musical numbers alone, the film was pretty great.

But a film isn’t just its music; it’s also its acting and its rawness, particularly for a film that has the responsibility to shine a light on the realities of life in show-business.

You’d think with a Hollywood A-lister like Scarlett Johansson; she’d be able to carry a terrible film. Directed by Jonathan Glazer, who debuted with a fantastic film that you should add to your list, this film, which is sci-fi and aliens and galactic hitchhiking, should not be.

Basically, Johansson is an alien who spends more than enough time in her lingerie. But this film was just, well, a little bit strange and involves alien Scarlett driving around town luring men into her van. Yikes.

Poor ScarJo, we just aren’t quitting here and giving her films the overrated tick. The film “Lost in Translation” has a cult following. The real star of the film, however, (despite Bill Murray’s cynical and somewhat blasé commentary) is Tokyo. We didn’t love the plot (there wasn’t really a plot?), but we did enjoy the shots of Tokyo’s skyscrapers and the view from the ritzy Park Hyatt’s famous bar with floor-to-ceiling glass panels.

Whilst you do get to experience what could be a good time in Tokyo through the eyes of our mildly disillusioned main actors, it’s more of a film you’d have on in the background because it doesn’t really… go anywhere.

Ah, scary movie fans, this one goes out to you! In 1999, the film was all anyone could really talk about. Some said it changed them forever and thus dawned the era of found footage films. The film’s premise is centered on three “friends” who hear an urban legend of the Blair Witch, so they go about exploring the woods to catch it first hand.

But the issue is, none of our protagonists were all that likable. Most of the time, you’re listening to their whiny antics as they delve deeper into the woods. Oh, and spoiler alert: you never actually see the witch on screen. Boo!

Sure, for certain generations, “The Brady Bunch” was a cult TV show, with millions of people tuning in to see what shenanigans the Brady family got up to each week. The main joke of the film is that the wheel of time has chugged on, but for the family, they’re still in their little 1970s bubble! Complete with 70s decor!

But alas, the family forgot to pay their taxes and now could lose their home. Long story short, the film is like a lukewarm bath. Maybe things would’ve been more humorous if they’d been made to see the realities of the 90s world they were now in!

So we’ve seen the TikTok videos of people claiming they can reverse parallel park (we’d like to see proof, thanks), but whilst there are a number of fans who’d want to be among the ranks of their faux family, there’s also a heck of a lot of backlash!

Car chase scenes and small family dramas (which then escalate to the point where Vin Diesel achieves the equivalent of a superhero landing in his car.) How they’ve churned out nine films so far is kind of beyond us.

So firstly, let’s just remember that it would be nigh impossible to follow “The Lord of the Rings” with a trilogy that would even come close to the Academy Award-winning franchise. But some of the fans were at least hopeful that at least they’d be able to be transported once again to the world of Middle Earth.

Maybe there was a lack of likability among the band of hobbits or the fact that they drew out what should’ve been a maximum of two films into three. Overlong and a little bit of a slow story, these films got the overrated badge from viewers and critics alike.

Before we dive into the film’s flaws, we can agree on the fact that “Baby Driver” did indeed have a great soundtrack. The songs set the scene, sort of an audio commentary for each of the obstacles our protagonist, portrayed by the boyishly handsome Ansel Elgort.

The issue many audience members had was that it was just a little too predictable. A bank heist gone wrong, double-crossing, and the hope of a budding love story on the horizon. Some of the driving sequences gave us a little rollercoaster thrill, but apart from that, the film left many people a little bit underwhelmed.

A supposed classic of 1955, a triumph that has been touted as “ahead of its time” – but believe it or not, this certainly isn’t the consensus on this film! James Dean, who was 24 at the time, portrays a disgruntled youth (his character is supposedly 16), and whilst some audiences agree he played his part well, others thought it childish that a 24-year-old man was throwing teenage tantrums.

When you look at the setting, things are pretty bleak: Jim Stark’s home life is torn to shreds between his melodramatic mother and a father who couldn’t care less.

Apart from the introductions, whereby we find that Cameron Diaz, Lucy Liu, and Drew Barrymore are our “angels,” the movie doesn’t really get much better. It also seems that women are always chasing after a man, but maybe that’s just Hollywood’s favorite narrative to repeat.

Though we didn’t mind P!nk’s “Feel Good Time,” – it had a pretty fun film clip too! One of our favorite quotes, as seen on Rotten Tomatoes, was, “The movie is constructed not so much of scenes, but of the poses that Charlie’s Voguers throw as they preen and pout their way through a series of pop videos.” Now that is very well said.

Another Christopher Nolan “masterpiece” under fire…quite literally. The film, “Dunkirk,” which is set on the beaches of the same name, feels like a long, slow, drawn-out disaster film. Perhaps that was the point – it wasn’t a battle that ended well for anybody. The fact troops could only be evacuated in an agonizingly slow and methodical manner was extremely frustrating, and overall the film reeked with despair.

One redeeming scene was the final one – where Tom Hardy’s plane lands on the beach. But overall, it was a disappointing film, with what seemed like repeating scenes and a lack of any real emotion or grit.

So they call this one of the greatest love stories of all time..teens across the globe reached for their tissues to recollect themselves whilst on the rollercoaster of the 1940s romance. But if we really look at the film and what it’s about, you may not like what you find. Noah, played by the charming Ryan Gosling, is basically a stalker who finds McAdams’ Allie super pretty and then keeps at it because, you know, persistence pays off.

The film is very unrealistic, particularly in regards to today’s standards of compatibility and what’s preached about ‘falling in love.’ Allie should’ve ended up with Lon – he treated her well, accepted her as she was, and also could take care of her.

Before you come after us with torches and pitchforks, shaking your fists angrily, just hear us out. “The Wizard of Oz,” a fantastical film that follows a young girl, Dorothy, as she’s transported to a place…meets a tin man and a scarecrow, etc., etc.

We will first acknowledge that for its time (it was released in 1939), it was a triumph for technology and what a camera could capture. But is it well written? Is it acted convincingly? Is it directed well? Not really. The transition from black and white to the all-color world was fun, but Garland’s overacting and naïveté is a little much, and please…how does a witch melt with just…water?

Pretty much the only reason people flocked to watch the “Ghostbusters” remake was to see Chris Hemsworth don a pair of glasses and unleash that broad Australian accent. And while Bill Murray’s cameo was kinda cool, it was hard not to overlook the original.

While we had to judge this film as a standalone, it was still hard. The cameos of original actors, the many jokes that were carried forward from the original, and a cover of the “Ghostbusters” theme song…well, maybe it is just a bad remake?

First, we’ll just that say a certain Hollywood producer that was behind this film. But there are issues aside from that. While we love Robin Williams, Matt Damon, and Ben Affleck, the film seems very stuck in its time, especially when it comes to social dynamics.

But maybe that’s why it’s loved – because it’s a reminder of the past. As long as we move forward, right?

If you read the books, like hundreds of millions of others, you may have been anticipating the films. Unfortunately, when the book came to life, we got a taste of Kristen Stewart’s terrible acting. The expressions that never really changed were painful.

And Robert Pattinson’s “intensity” that makes it look like he’s well… constipated. Even the actors in the film were said to have laughed at their own portrayals and characters. So maybe it’s okay if we think this is overrated!

There was a lot of anticipation about this film, notably due to the stellar cast and the costume design. We will say the costume design is 10/10, but apart from that, we didn’t really love the story. The film, which has been reviewed as something of a ‘hot mess,’ was basically thrust into the spotlight because it was hyped by the right people.

The plot description…was, well, nowhere to be seen. It’s extremely confusing and makes no sense – about the same amount of sense as “Inception.” Blame the leaders of the pack for trying to confuse us into praising this film.

We know Tarantino fans are not to be reckoned with. You all revel in violence and drama, so keep your distance. But while “Pulp Fiction” is celebrated as a cult film and a “must watch,” it does get a little confusing with Tarantino’s somewhat disorienting film directing. It’s a clever film, but it doesn’t quite have the depth, nor does it have meaning.

Themes and scenes that could be explored (like the epiphany Jules has in the film or the harrowing events of Butch’s day) aren’t, and it has left some critics and audiences scratching their heads, wanting more.

You cannot deny that everyone loves a bit of man candy, particularly when it’s packaged up so nicely in the form of Channing Tatum, Joe Manganiello, Adam Rodriguez, and Matt Bomer. Also, lucky Jada Pinkett Smith. Anyway, this film is fun and stylish (kinda) with really little substance.

A boys’ weekend isn’t a typical boys’ weekend because their idea of partying is coming up with choreography to dance for screaming women who throw dollar bills (and more) at them.

“La La Land” definitely did one thing – put us right to sleep. Maybe it was looking into Ryan Gosling’s eyes for too long. Also, it’s musical, in case no one told you before you bought your ticket. The Oscar-winner follows a tried and true tale of two people chasing their lifelong dreams. Some of the film’s direction is decent, but you shouldn’t rely on that to save your film.

The story is just…well, boring. And they don’t end up holding hands and riding into the sunset. Emma Stone’s character lacked depth (not for lack of the right actress) and was unconvincing. And she won an Oscar. Hmm. Then there was the jazz issue.

So maybe we just didn’t “get it,” but “Ad Astra” left us feeling a bit scientifically clueless. The internet supports us in our thinking – some found it too long, not sci-fi enough, and just a bit underdeveloped with bad physics. People who were, in fact, engineers in aerospace noted that it was “boring” and had gratuitous gore scenes.

Even with Brad Pitt at the helm (who gave a largely inauthentic, unbelievable portrayal of his character), he really couldn’t steer this spacecraft from crashing miserably into the overrated pile of films.

Ah yes, another film that’s kind of about nothing. Sure, names like Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence dazzle, and their quirky interactions made them somewhat loveable, but at the core of this story is a question: does dance really cure mental illness?

Seems a bit farfetched to us. Yes, it’s a tried and tested formula of cute boy and girl, ex lingering in the background, budding love story blah blah. Then the added complications of family and mental health issues are just magically healed by a few dance montages? Oh, and the family fortune was bet on their performance at the end. Say what?

Just because Will Ferrel is in it does not mean it gets an automatic pass into the comedic hall of fame, okay? Like every sequel to a great first film, sometimes it just doesn’t live up to it. Sure, a number of glittering cameos from the likes of Liam Neeson, Jim Carrey, Kanye West, and Sacha Baron Cohen added a little spice to Ferrell and Carrell, but it just isn’t enough.

More chaos than comedic story, the film runs off course with a plotline that twists and turns far away from the original film. It’s still “funny,” but it doesn’t live up to the glory of the first film.

This film’s gotten quite a bit of criticism of late, and some people are of the opinion that it should stay in the ’80s. In saying that, there were just a few teeny little things that we wanted to pick on today (maybe we woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning).

The film follows the ascent of a middleweight boxer (with an added love interest from the Bronx) who gets so far and then finds his lack of emotional availability is a hindrance in the ring and in his life. “Raging Bull” feels excruciatingly long, and the once-praised slo-mo boxer scenes just leave us yelling, “that’s so staged!”

First and foremost, all hail Adam Driver. What a hunk of a man. Not like we have a crush or anything. The film, which was supposed to be a comeback for director Steven Soderbergh, and included A-listers like Channing Tatum and Daniel Craig, just didn’t quite hit the mark.

But we stayed for the satire of the rambunctious culture of the South. And maybe just to watch Tatum and Craig adopt some cringeworthy Southern accents.

So without this 1974 film, we probably wouldn’t have seen the likes of Friday the 13th or Halloween, for that matter. Maybe the entire ‘Slasher’ genre wouldn’t have been born! But while many call it a “classic,” it’s a pretty slow film, and it gets a little bit predictable.

Long story short, Texan teens end up in a deserted old house. You can guess the rest. ” Love it or hate it, a slasher film draws crowds and brings in the dollars, which this film did.

The film “American Beauty” has probably one good scene: the plastic bag scene. The way it floats and dances in the wind is pretty poetic. But then again, it’s a plastic bag. And it says a lot if that’s the best scene in the entire film.

Sure, it won Best Picture for the way it explored the themes of living authentically in a consumerist, materialistic world that focuses on appearances. But basically, it’s about a relatively affluent guy whose own self-pity transforms him into a larger beast altogether. Some viewers have felt that it doesn’t really deserve the attention it got.

It looked cool, had the big blockbuster feel, but, well, it just wasn’t great. It’s likely that Megan Fox had to do with those high box office numbers. Not to mention other gratuitous shots that remind us that Michael Bay is a Hollywood director who knows that big explosions get audiences on the edge of their seats.

Critics and audiences definitely got their “bang for their buck,” but the majority of the characters were lackluster and came out with some lines that were hardly short of disastrous. We’d rather watch Terminator, thanks.

Believe me; we do enjoy it when a dad goes all vigilante-super soldier on us. After the first two Taken films, the directors thought they’d give Liam Neeson another spin before ending the trilogy of the retired agent rescuing his family from human traffickers and overlords.

We will say that the first film was pretty darn good – it was suspenseful, and “particular set of skills” will forever be in memes,  but maybe after we got used to the story and caught onto the plotline, it got a little tired by the time the third film rolled around: same story, different city.

The film adaptation of Nicholas Sparks’ book “A Walk to Remember” is a cry fest. It’s a classic bad-boy meets the daughter of the reverend. Is that classic? Okay, anyway, his life is forever changed ya-da-ya-da; the movie ends tragically (but they say “I do” first, because of good fashioned values.)

But there are some things that, in hindsight, we didn’t quite get: like the trope that being beautiful was masked by an ugly sweater she wore. Please. It’s Mandy Moore we’re talking about. Also, she knows it – come on, as if someone who is nerdy and lacks self-confidence would say, “promise you won’t fall in love with me.” Psh.

Another film that’s been deemed a classic. Because you know, anything that has Bill Murray, AND Chevy Chase, AND Michael O’Keefe is bound to create something memorable.

The golfing comedy from 1980 has left the world divided: some love it and think it’s positively hilarious, and others just didn’t get the hype. Sure, comedy is pretty subjective, but we’d rather watching “Groundhog Day.”

This film recently came into contention following its portrayal of slavery throughout the film. Sure, it’s a period drama, a historical romance film set during the American Civil War, but did it really deserve 10 Oscars? 10?!

The fact it was in color was groundbreaking for the film at the time, but the film just doesn’t hold up or translate too well in today’s social climate. It softens the Civil War, romanticizing it rather than portraying it truthfully. Also, the overacting pains us. Sorry Hollywood, this film will only remain as a relic of a period of filmmaking that wasn’t great.

Clowns are pretty creepy, right? Did you know it’s commonly listed as a top fear for many people? That obviously was the inspiration for Stephen King to write a book that was exactly about that. The 2017 film ups the horror scale, but perhaps the thing that lets it down is that the original pick for the director’s chair, Cary Joji Fukunaga, had his version of the film rewritten by the studio. Boo.

The final director was Andy Muschietti. Some audience reviews called it an average Hollywood horror flick, with some uninspired score and a strange script. But apparently, Pennywise was acted excellently. What do you think?

Before we start, let’s just throw out the disclaimer that we do enjoy a good James Bond flick. We also totally heart Daniel Craig as 007. He’s the buff, emotionally damaged modern Bond that we never knew we needed. He reprises his role as MI5’s top agent, but sadly, the film kind of ends with us snoring.

Also, can we just say that the Bond girl, played by Lea Seydoux, provided the single-most uninspired performance across the entire Bond timeline? It was that bad. Sorry, Lea, you are beautiful, but your acting in this film was pretty terrible. “Spectre” tried to amp up the action but left us all looking bewildered and incredulous. And Blofeld could never have survived the explosion in Africa. Bit of a train wreck when it came to the writing, sorry.

Who doesn’t love a bit of Hugh Jackman? The Boy from Oz, one of our favorite Aussie actors, came back with more Wolverine goodness to show us a future where mutants are rarer than ever. The plot is this: Logan goes on a road trip with Laura, and they fight peeps along the way.

There’s the looming presence of villain, Dr. Rice, but he’s more bark than bite, it seems. And he has a British accent, to boot! But the major downfall is that Logan’s worst enemy is…well, a clone of himself. And then it ends in heartbreak. But overall, we’re disappointed because this film could’ve been so much more – why were no mutants born over the past quarter of a century? How did all the X-Men just all die? I guess we’ll never know.

While this film scored an IMDb score of 7.7 from audiences, critics on Rotten Tomatoes gave it only 33%. The actual ‘effect’ itself states that one event sets off another, and over time the effect is amplified many times and can, in fact, alter history. But let’s cut to Ashton Kutcher, who’s playing a kid who suffers blackouts.

During said blackouts, he travels back to painful childhood memories, as well as somehow being able to change the past for his friends. But that one effect sets off a chain reaction and so on and so forth. The premise seems interesting, right? Sadly the film didn’t live up to the story’s potential, with too much focus on some twisted topics, left critics called it “lobotomized entertainment that’s dark, violent and hilariously dumb.”

With a measly 16% from Rotten Tomatoes critics, we have the story of another film that had potential – so much potential – but instead of leaping to fame, fell flat on its face. The sci-fi adventure, which promises exotic locations and a steady stream of SFX, the books-turned-film, follows David Rice, a kid who finds he can teleport at will.

What would any person do with that power? Rob banks, of course. Anywho, Samuel L. Jackson shows up to stop him, and then it’s a cat and mouse chase. But honestly, there’s a lot that went unexplained: first, how the heck does the guy teleport? How does it work? Why him? Then the film ends super abruptly. Sadly, it falls very short.

To all the moms and teenage girls out there, don’t come at us with your ire. “The Fault in Our Stars” is a film that could’ve, would’ve, should’ve been a torturous experience, twisting and pulling at our heartstrings. After all, it is indeed a story of “star-crossed lovers” who are doomed with terminal illnesses.

Many films which are based on a novel don’t end up living up to what flowed so beautifully on-page and what captured many people’s hearts. Sadly, this film pales in comparison.  We only stayed because the pair were flown to Amsterdam. But then we felt a visceral reaction to the scene where the pair kiss in the attic of Anne Frank’s house. Oh, and then people applaud. Goodness, gracious.

Many a little person grew up wanting to be a character in a Disney animation. Alas, they were animated. But then, Hermione Granger (sorry, Emma Watson) decided that it wasn’t enough to be a female heroine witch in the “Harry Potter” series and decided to board the Disney bandwagon.

Okay, this may be an unpopular opinion, and some of the effects are pretty grand (the ballroom and that golden yellow dress – d’awww!), but there’s this overall blandness that’s left audiences and critics wanting well.. not just A Tale As Old As Time. Belle did get a do-over, with a nice dash of feminist spice to try and rewrite the history books, but we think it was in vain.

Love them or hate them; musicals just can’t stay away from the big screen. Some enjoy singing along, while others could think of a million other things to do instead of sitting through two hours of an actor (who’s an actor first and foremost) try to sing. And to think, this musical won ‘Best Picture’! Not to mention winning six Academy Awards.

The problem with “Chicago,” despite the talents of Catherine Zeta-Jones and Renee Zellweger to prop up the film, was that it was just a couple of murderous women singing about their crimes. It tried to be alluring and mysterious, but many audiences thought it fell a little short!

It’s kind of ironic what with the title of this film, because honestly, the Judd Apatow- directed, Amy Schumer-written film really is, well, a Trainwreck. The protagonist is kind of likable, but she’s ultimately a shallow, commitment-phobe. Then in typical rom-com fashion, she magically ends up writing about the sports doc she ends up falling in love with.

When he seems to like her vibe, Schumer’s character starts to rethink her ways. It’s been labeled “the worst film Apatow has made” by some fans; it’s full of cop-outs and a character whose behavior just isn’t very funny. We also think Apatow could’ve used Bill Hader more – he deserves better! But hey, LeBron James is in it.

The film which had probably the most hype out of all the films on this list is none other than James Cameron’s CGI extravaganza, “Avatar.” As the man who brought us “Terminator,” “Aliens,” and “Titanic,” we think this is his most overrated film to date.

Also, it was one of the first 3D offerings – but it’s impossible to watch it in 2D (and most people have a 2D tv, so.) But once everyone had their ‘wow’ moment, they quickly saw there wasn’t much behind it, and it doesn’t stack up to other sci-fi films.

Don’t you just love going back in time to criticize films that are from a bygone era? There’s definitely one iconic scene in this film: Ursula Andress and her beach entrance in that white bikini. Maybe we shouldn’t have had such high expectations, with it being the first Bond film made.

But the problems are many: the characters are overall pretty bland, the villains aren’t really THAT scary, and plot-wise it’s pretty uneventful. But maybe that’s because Bond in this film is actually doing his spy thing – recon and stakeouts and the like. Maybe people like it because it was the first, and that’s all there is to it. Thoughts?

Ah, nostalgia. The good ol’ days, as some would put it. The 1971 classic film, where Gene Wilder plays a seemingly bumbling (but oddly sadistic) candy maker, has since been revamped (and set to be remade AGAIN). But we’re focusing on the OG here. Originally written by Roald Dahl (who confessed it was his least favorite work), Mel Stuart’s vision brought the candy maker to life.

The film sets about honoring some traits which just aren’t cool – Wonka’s somewhat unfriendly disposition and his withdrawal from reality, as well as not having a care in the world as to what happens to the children. Not quite candy land, eh?

Critics perhaps harshly gave this film a mere 18% on Rotten Tomatoes. Maybe it was the cultural stereotypes and onslaught of dude jokes. Sure, the buddy-cop style doesn’t ever seem to tire audiences, but by the time the third film rolled around, it got a bit predictable.

Even one of the film’s stars, Jackie Chan, commented, “I dislike ‘Rush Hour’ the most, but ironically it sold really well in the U.S. and Europe.” Sigh.

Yikes. This saccharine film preaches self-acceptance, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it also waters down some pressing social issues. It generated a lot of hype, but it feels forced. Pretty robots, played by Zac Efron and a blonde you can kind of forget – are cast alongside the female lead, who maniacally declares her love (in song, of course) for Efron after a literal brush of the arm in the school hallway. No wooing.

He hasn’t shown any interest in her, and yet, she’s in love (because of his looks, she knows nothing about him, right?). But the bigger problem with this film is the fact they had John Travolta play a female lead.

Love him or hate him, there’s no doubt that Adam Sandler is a king of comedy. The film, which is loosely based on “Cactus Flower,” sees Sandler (an LA plastic surgeon) and Jennifer Aniston (his assistant), with a cameo from Nicole Kidman (which is probably the most laughable part), in a film which is pretty cringe-worthy.

Sandler meets Brooklyn Decker, a blonde but brainless Ms. Right! From there, the lying starts, and an elaborate scheme pulls in Aniston to play his faux ex-wife. The writing is lazy, the jokes are bad, and it feels like anyone on board just wanted to hit some big box office numbers because it’s an Adam Sandler film. Sigh.