The Most Overrated Books Showing 2,901-2,950 of 5,680

[Petergiaquinta]

Somebody's still drinking, it looks like...not sure what's going on there, and I don't know what causes this anger regarding Cormac McCarthy. Anybody mad at Toni Morrison?

[Petergiaquinta]

Sometimes I get angry at that crackpot poseur James Joyce. And then I back off and realize it's just me not smart enough to drink it all in.

[Karen]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Sometimes I get angry at that crackpot poseur James Joyce. And then I back off and realize it's just me not smart enough to drink it all in."

I understand.

[Cosmic]

Karen wrote: "Petergiaquinta wrote: "Sometimes I get angry at that crackpot poseur James Joyce. And then I back off and realize it's just me not smart enough to drink it all in."

I understand."

I know you feel.

[Mochaspresso]

Is it ok to go off on a tangent and talk about overrated movies? I just watched "Gravity" and thought it was grossly overrated.

[Kallie]

Mochaspresso wrote: "Is it ok to go off on a tangent and talk about overrated movies? I just watched "Gravity" and thought it was grossly overrated."

A tangent appeals at this point. What is 'Gravity' and how did you find it overrated?

[Petergiaquinta]

Technologically speaking, it's a marvel of a film I guess. But like my wife said, it's really just two hours of Sandra Bullock shrieking and grunting.

[Mochaspresso]

Kallie wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Is it ok to go off on a tangent and talk about overrated movies? I just watched "Gravity" and thought it was grossly overrated."

A tangent appeals at this point. What is 'G..."

It's a movie starring Sandra Bullock and George Clooney. It made a ton of money at the box office and won tons of awards. I was expecting to be blown away by special effects and I honestly wasn't. I thought much of the CGI seemed cartoony and Disneyworldish. It reminded me of some of the special effects used in Titanic. When you watch, especially on today's tv's, you can clearly tell that many of the people walking on the decks are animated and are not real. I thought the same of space effects and backdrops used in Gravity.

The movie is about two astronauts who struggle to survive an accident during a mission (...debris in space from a damaged satellite strikes their shuttle and leaves them stranded in space.) I thought Clooney's character was great, even if he does have a few Buzz Lightyear moments, and he's a wonderful actor. He makes the movie, but he's not the real star. The story is mostly about Bullock and her acting in this was just meh for me. I didn't feel her terror. She just seemed to hyperventilate a lot, imo...which I guess was supposed to add to the "drama" because she's using up all of the oxygen faster when she's in a situation when she needs to keep calm and conserve it. Ironically, despite their need to conserve oxygen, Clooney talked an awful lot about nothing and everything. Clooney's banter to calm her reminded me of the mindless jovial banter that my gynecologist uses to distract me while he inspects my innards.

I think my real problem with Gravity was my expectations. I was expecting action and special effects and I got characters and a lot of dialogue. I was expecting an action flick about the struggle to survive in outer space and I got two astronauts talking to each other because they floating around in outer space with nothing else to do or anyone else to talk to.

[Priyanka]

Well , I just thought someone would mention The Perks of Being a Wallflower . Anyway , Catcher in the Rye is overrated ?? I mean , showing one form of the human persona and psychic is overrated . There was complete honesty and vulnerability in every single page , and honestly speaking , I think there are still many Holden's out there who are hiding themselves from coming out . How can someone say this novel is overrated ?? Anybody saying that this novel is overrated , you guys just didn't get this book at all . We all have at least 50 % of Holden's personality . We are just so ignorant towards accepting it .

[Karen]

Mochaspresso wrote: "Kallie wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Is it ok to go off on a tangent and talk about overrated movies? I just watched "Gravity" and thought it was grossly overrated."

A tangent appeals at this poi..."

I guess it's no fun when George Clooney reminds you of your gynecologist- oh wait! That could be fun depending on how you think of it.
Seriously though, I liked the movie. It was unbelievable, but it's hard for an actress to carry a movie by herself for two hours, so I thought Bullocks performance was very good, and Clooney was funny. I especially liked looking at the earth from the satelite.

[Kallie]

Priyanka wrote: "Well , I just thought someone would mention The Perks of Being a Wallflower . Anyway , Catcher in the Rye is overrated ?? I mean , showing one form of the human persona and psychic is overrated . ..."

CitR has generated so much argument here, but many still discussing agree with you. Well said about the Holden within us.

[Kallie]

Mochaspresso wrote: "Kallie wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Is it ok to go off on a tangent and talk about overrated movies? I just watched "Gravity" and thought it was grossly overrated."

A tangent appeals at this poi..."

Thanks. I probably won't bother as it sounds like usual overblown Hollywood b.s. I recommend 'The Immigrant,' already available for streaming. There is an interesting review by James Brody in the New Yorker.

[Petergiaquinta]

The best movie I've seen recently is the Iranian film A Separation. It won the Oscar in 2012 for foreign language films. I don't get out much, so it takes me a while to see things...

It's definitely worth finding and seeing!

[[deleted user]]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "The best movie I've seen recently is the Iranian film A Separation. It won the Oscar in 2012 for foreign language films. I don't get out much, so it takes me a while to see things...

It's definite..."
Oh yes that is a brilliant film, one of the best I have seen in years. I saw it last year.
Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divided_... and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mephisto... 2 of my favourites

[Karen]

A different movie theme, this is what I watched recently, a documentary, I liked it.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The
Devil_and_Daniel_Johnston

[Leslie]

Lucie wrote: "Petergiaquinta wrote: "The best movie I've seen recently is the Iranian film A Separation. It won the Oscar in 2012 for foreign language films. I don't get out much, so it takes me a while to see t..."

It's (A Separation) available at my library = yay! I love to hear about these kinds of little gems, since I don't have TV and avoid most commercial media. Look forward to seeing it, thanks Peter and Lucie :) The last foreign film I enjoyed was over a year ago... "The Intouchables".

[Mochaspresso]

Edward wrote: "Just a general comment. To address your question of what books will be remembered 200 years from now, I think it essential to visualize what type of world there will be. The best reviews merely con..."

I'm not exactly the biggest Ayn Rand fan, but I think her appeal is not, nor will ever have anything to do with the technical aspects of her writing. I suspect that her appeal and any lasting appeal will revolve around her subject matter and themes.

[C.]

Based on the list alone, I'd vote that Twilight was the most highly overrated. The others are made literary history (The Da Vinci Code being the exception) and should be read to understand what was happening in the past. Atlas Shrugged was way ahead of its time. Catcher In The Rye opened the world to a new way of thinking about and writing for a younger generation. Gatsby is prose rich. Moby Dick a struggle, but ladened with metaphor. I'm still Waiting for Godot. To dismiss them is ignorance.

[Leslie]

C. wrote: "Based on the list alone, I'd vote that Twilight was the most highly overrated. The others are made literary history (The Da Vinci Code being the exception) and should be read to understand what was..."

Do you think it matters what context the rating is made with? After all, I sometimes rate a book simply against its "peers". I certainly don't consider all 4-star ratings to be equal to each other, and I will use a higher standard for books that fall into a literary category than those which are simply and obviously pleasure reads. I haven't read anything from the "Twilight bucket," so I am not sure how I would rate it. Does anyone confuse the weight of a 5-star Moby Dick rating with a 5-star Twilight rating? Are we saying that a 5-star rating for Twilight is an over-rating amongst it's peers of "guilty pleasures"? ...probably...but had to question.

[Renee E]

That is an excellent point, Leslie. I've wondered how others come to their decisions because I'm sure we all get there differently.

I usually base mine on whether the book has accomplished what I thought it was aiming at and how well it did that, for example, if it's a mystery/suspense story and it's technically well done and the story keeps my interest it gets a three — that's general competence. If it keeps me awake until I get done and the characters grab my attention that's a definite four, at least. If I don't have it all figured out well before the end, it's well written, engaging and the characters stay in character and evoke an emotional response from me, that's a five.

Other genres have different criteria for me, appropriate to the type, and poor literary fiction . . . it has to live up to a lot; it especially has to make me think things I haven't thought before and it has to have the ring of truth and an understanding and illustration of human nature. It has to teach me something.

[Karen]

C. wrote: "Based on the list alone, I'd vote that Twilight was the most highly overrated. The others are made literary history (The Da Vinci Code being the exception) and should be read to understand what was..."

C. wrote: "Based on the list alone, I'd vote that Twilight was the most highly overrated. The others are made literary history (The Da Vinci Code being the exception) and should be read to understand what was..."

I've dismissed The Da Vinci Code, not due to ignorance, but because I am not interested, and have heard from people I respect that in THEIR opinion it's not very well written.

Actually, from just looking at what I wrote above, I think I misunderstood you concerning The DaVinci code, I am so off today. :)

[Petergiaquinta]

Renee wrote: "I've wondered how others come to their decisions because I'm sure we all get there differently...Other genres have different criteria for me"

I'm with you. The genre is important to how I rate a book, as well as how I'm feeling on any given day.

For example, I just gave 4 stars to A Princess of Mars because I enjoyed it tremendously and it's a pioneering work of sci fi. (But if I was judging it on the spectrum I use for good books, it would get a 2.)

And I just gave 4 stars to A Long Way Gone, an autobiographical look at child soldiers in Sierra Leone and a quasi YA read. (But if I were judging it against those better books again, it would barely get a 3.)

For me, Saunders Tenth of December is a recent 4 on my subjective scale for "good books": Dickens, Faulkner, Borges, Eco, Rushdie, McCarthy(!). It's a great read by a great author, but not quite as good as Midnight's Children or Beloved or As I Lay Dying or even The Road.

And I'm not sure my ratings really matter anyway to anyone except myself. I've given 1's (see my Hemingway and my Bell Jar, for example) to some books that are far better than some of the 5's I've awarded (Harold and the Purple Crayon, yo?), and if you put a gun to my head I'd change them. Nonetheless, I'm pretty selective about the books I give 1's and 5's to.

But the 3's and 4's? That's pretty flexible and a lot of time I'd be hard pressed to justify them. I'm not God writing on tablets of stone; I'm just some guy with too much time on his hands over the summer. And especially when we're talking about what I consider as good books, I judge books by the same author against each other. So a 3 on a Vonnegut novel is in response to everything I've read by Vonnegut and could well be better than many another 4 and 5 by a different author.

Do I contradict myself? Very well I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes.

[Gary]

Karen wrote: "I've dismissed The Da Vinci Code, not due to ignorance, but because I am not interested, and have heard from people I respect that in THEIR opinion it's not very well written."

There are a LOT of reasons not to read that book, and those are among them. I'd say there are only two good reasons to read TDVC. First, the structure is... interesting. It's fans often talk about how the book is a page turner or action packed, etc. It's not really. It's just the way he (or the editor) structured the chapter breaks and scene shifts. They are laid out in a very "unnatural" way. That is, the breaks occur in the middle of action sequences or with "cliff hanger" moments, so one moves right through them. The book really isn't more "action packed" or a "page turner" than any number of other books, but the way it's physically on the page tricks people into reading it differently.

It's also an example of how easily sucked in many people are to the lure of conspiracy. As a conspiracy theory, TDVC is middling-poor. Above, say, Moon Landing nuts and well below the NSA is spying on us. It's JFK assassination conspiracy level goofy. That is, it's right at the level where a goodly number of people will buy into it. As such, it's interesting to see how that might be woven into a novel at the right tempo....

Other than that, though, it's not worth the time.

[Leslie]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Harold and the Purple Crayon, yo?"

Without even reading "Twilight," "Harold and the Purple Crayon" kicks it's ass on any scale (and the Da Vinci Code, which I did have the displeasure of gagging down). :D I rate authors against themselves too. I'll also change ratings as the books settles in my mind a bit.

[Gary]

Leslie wrote: "I certainly don't consider all 4-star ratings to be equal to each other, and I will use a higher standard for books that fall into a literary category than those which are simply and obviously pleasure reads."

I'm sure that's what happens most of the time. If one reads a detective novel then most people are probably comparing it to other detective novels not Remembrance of Things Past. I'm sure any number of 4-5 star ratings are given to books based on a comparison to other popcorn level diversions, not on a rating of the book compared to literature as a whole.

[Petergiaquinta]

Leslie wrote: "Without even reading "Twilight," "Harold and the Purple Crayon" kicks it's ass on any scale"

I'd like to see Harold draw Edward Cullen with a stake through his sparkly heart!

[Leslie]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Leslie wrote: "Without even reading "Twilight," "Harold and the Purple Crayon" kicks it's ass on any scale"

I like to see Harold draw Edward Cullen with a stake through his sparkly heart!"

That would definitely be worth the $9.99 + 5-star rating!

[Kallie]

I don't trust ratings of literary works. Too often I've disliked a writer but felt intrigued enough try again and find that I can't get enough of them, at least for a while. Some I like right away, but cool to them. Others are perennial favorites that friends whom I consider good readers do not like in the least. Books like Raymond Chandler and James M. Cain cross over from genre into literary, or at least well-written, and if they don't I toss them. For me it always comes down to the writing but I think any reader may feel resistance to a style new to them, or a sensibility that offends them, and that can be a big factor in how they rate a book.

[Karen]

Kallie wrote: "I don't trust ratings of literary works. Too often I've disliked a writer but felt intrigued enough try again and find that I can't get enough of them, at least for a while. Some I like right awa..."

My problem is that if I don't like a book I will stop reading it, so mine don't have low ratings. And that prevents me from reading a wide range of authors.I only have about 50 books listed here because I won't list something I haven't finished.

[Stephen]

Karen wrote: "...My problem is that if I don't like a book I will stop reading it, so mine don't have low ratings."

Personally, since I started using GoodReads to track my reading I've only rated a handful of the books that I DNF (did not finish) And only then when I was quite certain that I wouldn't.

Here's a bit from a review that I wrote on a book that I did not finish. (by a woman author about a young gay man)

OK I try not to pan a book unless I've read it cover to cover but this one isn't worth that agony. Several times I've set it aside with the intention of picking it up again with a fresh attitude but that hasn't helped. Goodreads had four previous reviews, all by women, all in the four and five star range. I think that it needs the honest opinion of a gay man to counterbalance what I can only guess are the reviews of friends and family.

Here's a link to the full review if you'd like specifics,
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

I think that negative reviews and even DNF reviews are a service that we can provide to other readers.

[[deleted user]]

I just had to apologise to Donna Tartt ( not that she cares). I was curious if I REALLY dislike Goldfinch- I liked it till the middle so I started reading it again.
ANd I like it!
But then, I often change my mind.
Do you know the :
Women have much cleaner minds, they change them more often" LOL And yes I know should not laugh at my jokes- that is pathetic.

[Karen]

Lucie wrote: "I just had to apologise to Donna Tartt ( not that she cares). I was curious if I REALLY dislike Goldfinch- I liked it till the middle so I started reading it again.
ANd I like it!
But then, I oft..."

Oh you are funny. Part of the reason is that you laugh at your jokes.

[Karen]

Stephen wrote: "Karen wrote: "...My problem is that if I don't like a book I will stop reading it, so mine don't have low ratings."

Personally, since I started using GoodReads to track my reading I've only rated ..."

Well, I haven't read a book I disliked in a long time, the last one was The Handmaids Tale. I just remember hating it and finished it because I was asked to read it, and lied about what I thought of it! That was ten years ago. I have no idea if I would like it more now, but I can't adequately review it now. I can't even review my favorite book, not adequately- this type of writing is not my strength.

[Kallie]

Lucie wrote: "I just had to apologise to Donna Tartt ( not that she cares). I was curious if I REALLY dislike Goldfinch- I liked it till the middle so I started reading it again.
ANd I like it!
But then, I oft..."

Funny. But my husband's is at least as clean as mine then.

[Leslie]

Karen wrote: "Stephen wrote: "Karen wrote: "...My problem is that if I don't like a book I will stop reading it, so mine don't have low ratings."

Personally, since I started using GoodReads to track my reading ..."

I loved Handmaid's Tale when I read it for the first time a little over a year ago, and again for the second time just a month or so ago. For me anyway, I think it is one that has to be read/appreciated at the right time. I likely wouldn't have appreciated it when I was younger. I thought the 2 endings were perfect. I like Atwood's writing style and "voice" even if I don't like all of her stories.

[[deleted user]]

Karen wrote: "A different movie theme, this is what I watched recently, a documentary, I liked it.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The
Devil_and_Daniel_Johnston"
Yes I liked that, too , weird but interesting

[Karen]

Lucie wrote: "Karen wrote: "A different movie theme, this is what I watched recently, a documentary, I liked it.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The
Devil_and_Daniel_Johnston"

Yes aI liked that, too , weird but in..."

I'm glad you liked it.I was heartened by the fact that so many people seemed to love him and that he was accepted.

[Leslie]

Karen wrote: "Lucie wrote: "Karen wrote: "A different movie theme, this is what I watched recently, a documentary, I liked it.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The
Devil_and_Daniel_Johnston"

Yes aI liked that, to..."

Also at the library = -reserved- :D

[Karen]

Leslie wrote: "Karen wrote: "Lucie wrote: "Karen wrote: "A different movie theme, this is what I watched recently, a documentary, I liked it.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The
Devil_and_Daniel_Johnston"

Yes aI ..."

:D Cool! I love that word.

[Kallie]

Edward wrote: "Kallie wrote: "I don't trust ratings of literary works. Too often I've disliked a writer but felt intrigued enough try again and find that I can't get enough of them, at least for a while. Some I..."

Most often: Writers I already like; browsing in a bookstore my instinct often pays off; reviews in Harper's, NYRB, Guernica and the like; friends' recommendations; classics I haven't tried yet.

[Priyanka]

Such a cruel thing to call The catcher in the rye an overrated book .

[Monty J]

Priyanka wrote: "Such a cruel thing to call The catcher in the rye an overrated book ."

Could it be a trend, especially among the younger set, that things are overrated that don't give an adrenaline rush or can't be absorbed squinting through the 4-inch screen of a cell phone?

People gotta be entertained. Perhaps it has been too long since the mainstream, except New York or New Orleans, has really suffered.

Americans have had it so good for so long they aren't looking for answers to suffering in the human condition, as they were after WW 1 and the Great Depression and WW 2.

And while we've been lulled and hypnotized by Harry Potter and Batman and Spider Man and vampires and Princess Leah, the real enemies of society--John Birchers and other Right Wing extremists--have infiltrated into the political mainstream, subverting democracy and rigging the entire spectrum of government in favor of a wealthy elite.

I am beginning to think like Cosmic. The cliff Holden warned about is not just for kids; it's the vast majority of society.

[Matthew]

Priyanka wrote: "Such a cruel thing to call The catcher in the rye an overrated book ."


Overrated or not. It's just a way to stir the pot and promote lively discussion.

[Kallie]

Monty J wrote: "Priyanka wrote: "Such a cruel thing to call The catcher in the rye an overrated book ."

Could it be a trend, especially among the younger set, that things are overrated that don't give an adrenali..."

I'm afraid so. If a young reader doesn't learn to enjoy literature pretty early on, he/she is not likely to develop the taste later. It's like learning another language.

[Karen]

Kallie wrote: "Monty J wrote: "Priyanka wrote: "Such a cruel thing to call The catcher in the rye an overrated book ."

Could it be a trend, especially among the younger set, that things are overrated that don't ..."

Students are disracted by too many things, especially smart phones and computer games, they don't want to read, and yes, it needs to start early. If you don't have involved parents who read it's another real problem. I feel like I've said this before

[Howard]

Paula wrote: "Id agree with most, and I think you covered it well-

I will vehemently argue DaVinci code, I LOVED it, thought it deserved its hype.

I'll issue a minor harrumph over Gatsyby's making the most o..."

Of course, its hype was that it was terrible!

[Renee E]

Speaking of overrated, I don't recall if anyone's mentioned Pillars of the Earth?

[Paul Martin]

Oh god, or what about Fall of Giants?

[Renee E]

Don't know about Fall. After reading Pillars I doubt I will ever pick up another Follett book again, let alone spend good time reading it.

At least Dan Brown does a little character development and puts some thought into his convoluted hokum. But no, I'm not running out to buy his books either.

[Carrie]

Renee wrote: "Speaking of overrated, I don't recall if anyone's mentioned Pillars of the Earth?"

I think POTE and the Alchemist deserve to be on the list, for sure!