MovieChat Forums > Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969) Discussion > Overrated

Overrated

posted 10 years ago by childers-3
12 replies | jump to latest

I love Newman and Redford but this movie was awful. The banter back and forth was amusing at times, but it is slow, meandering, and just not that interesting. I saw it all the way through this weekend on HDNET and was thoroughly disappointed. I just couldn't figure out what all the hype was about. I thought they were much better in The Sting.

[–] asherp 10 years ago

Awful is a pretty harsh word for a movie where you enjoyed some of the witty banter...

Personally I think there are some pretty great and memorable scenes ...the opening scene...jumping off the cliff....the fight with Lurch...their last stand...

And so many other funny lines...

To each their own...but I can easily see how it gets a 8.2 ...I still enjoy watch it 45 years after it first came out.

[–] Corky666 10 years ago

Awful is not right, it was a well made flick, but yes very overrated in my opinion. It was so slow and I like slow if it's inspiring and telling. I just didn't care much about the main characters.
Would not watch again and I love the genre, although it didn't feel like a western to me.

[–] Farshnoshket 10 years ago

Friggin' children. This film wasn't made in 2014, it was made in 1969. The banter in this film is exactly what makes this film great. There is hardly another pair of actors in the annals that I would rather see banter than Newman & Redford. The stage presence of these 2 men could not be beat. And for G*d sakes, it's a western, kind of. Do you know other westerns that are fast paced?

If it took you this long to catch this classic you missed the boat. Sometimes to capture the magic of a film you need to find it yourself and not led to it. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make em' drink.

It's been a classic for almost 50 years and will always remain classic. If it's not your cup of tea it doesn't change a thing.

Stick to watching Timberlake. Maybe one day he'll be classic.

and you're not supposed to know what happened in "The Road". That no longer matters.

[–] Corky666 10 years ago

The best part of you definitely ran down the crack of your momma's assss

Sorry your feelings were hurt because a poster didn't like your movie. I don't get why idiots get so defensive over a flick. You should take a gun and blow your brains out. Trust me you'd be doing your family and everyone else a favor

[–] Cine-Freak 9 years ago

wow. i mean, you gotta be a troll for posting an answer like that, but you must be the most pathetic troll around imdb - which means a lot.
the guy makes a solid case for the movies status as a timeless classic. and you want him to shoot himself.
i guess the best part of you didnt even reach your moms ass.

[–] Corky666 9 years ago

You're an IDIOT AND SO IS YOUR MOTHER. He was condescending you DOPE

[–] m-slovak79 9 years ago

funny thing is i just re-watched both this and The Sting recently and i find Butch Cassidy holds up well for me where as The Sting i only mildly like nowadays.

----------
My Top 100-ish Movies of All-Time! = http://goo.gl/EYFYdz
----------

[–] Jakezen 9 years ago

well, I give you points for consistency. You rated Vacation (remake) an 8 and you call BCSK awful. You are consistently wrong.

[–] childers-3 9 years ago

Well, it's all relative. There's no wrong or right to someone's opinion. It's just an opinion. Apparently I hit a nerve with my post. I certainly wasn't trying to piss anyone off with it. People seem to take negative comments about movies they love so personal! To me, it was just boring and not engaging - but then I'm not a fan of westerns, except for maybe Lonesome Dove. I love gangster movies, which is why I probably liked their pairing in The Sting so much better.

"Well, make something up!" (RG)

[–] Jakezen 9 years ago

indeed, there is no accounting for taste. I like quirky movies which many find abhorable but I just can't get my hands around the Vacation(2015) rating and using the word awful to describe this movie. But, like you said, to each his own.....

[–] Dmitri_King 9 years ago

indeed, there is no accounting for taste.

To be fair, the OP said he doesn't really like westerns. And he said he liked Newman and Redford in "The Sting." So, perhaps he decided to watch Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, figuring that with its high accolades, it would be an exception to the rule. Turns out, for him, it wasn't.

I agree with the OP in that I don't understand why some people get so defensive when someone else criticizes a movie they like. Surely we all have a list of movies that are considered timeless classics that we dislike? I certainly have a rather lengthy one. And, I am guessing we all have some poorly-regarded movies that we like.

What's the point of clicking someone's profile just cherry-pick a "great" movie that he gave a low rating to and a "bad" movie he gave a high rating to? Should people just check the IMDB rating of a movie and give it that same rating? No, of course not. So, looking through anyone's ratings would probably result in a cherry-picked comparison of, "Oh, you gave [great movie] a 5, but you gave [bad movie] an 8, therefore you obviously know nothing about movies and your opinions are wrong and irrelevant." (Or some similarly dismissive statement.)

If you're going to do that to someone though, maybe you should make your own ratings public, so he can scroll through your ratings just to make sure you don't have any "wrong" ratings...

Personally, I liked Butch Cassidy and the Sundance kid, though I can understand why some people might not. It's certainly not among my favorites, but then, I don't really like westerns either. I probably only have one western among my 200 favorite movies. Does that mean my ratings are "wrong"?

Perhaps "awful" was a needlessly harsh word, but I can understand where the OP is coming from. There are some highly regarded movies that I found so painfully boring, I could only describe the viewing experience as "terrible" (or worse), even while acknowledging the technical merits of the film. For example, "There Will be Blood" is one of the most boring movies I have ever seen. Watching it was a miserable experience, but I stuck it out to the very end (and it's a long movie) because I figured, "there has to be a payoff here; so many people think this is one of the greatest movies ever made." I do not have any specific complaints about the technical aspects of the movie (lighting, music, etc.); I just don't see why anyone would find the story interesting. But, apparently people do. And I don't care that they do, and they shouldn't care that I don't. My hating the movie doesn't diminish their enjoyment in any way, does it?

[–] greenbudgie 9 years ago

I'm always looking out for good dialogue in movies. But I didn't really hear anything worth listening in this. I thought that the banter was half-wit rather than witty.