For the longest time, I found myself annoyed when I would read someone on the web saying, “I read _______, and it was just overrated, and I didn’t like it.”?
I wasn’t really sure why it bugged me, but it did. It wasn’t that someone didn’t like the book. Not all books I love are for everyone. But if the vast majority of comic book readers and creators are continually and repeatedly saying that Alan Moore’s Watchmen is a work of genius, and have been doing so for more than two decades, it’s safe to assume that the book is not in fact overrated, but that the reader just didn’t like it.
The word overrated implies that everyone else is wrong, and the single reviewer is the only true answer, or “mine is the only opinion that matters.”? I understand that most of you reading this will know me as a reviewer, but one of the most important things I learned early on was that if I put my opinion out there, I had to allow for the possibility that I was wrong, and that others might disagree. It was really about the idea that I didn’t want to insult people who didn’t have the same opinion as me (unless it was Ron). To me, criticism has really turned into a discussion, rather than a proclamation.
I don’t think it’s really possible for something to be overrated. It’s possible to read something that’s supposed to be good, and not connect to the material, but that doesn’t really change the fact that most people think it’s really good. It’s not that everyone else is wrong, and you’re right, but that the work just didn’t connect with you for some reason. It might have had to do with raised expectations that nothing could meet, or the mood you were in when you read it, or just that your taste is different. But everyone else isn’t wrong.
There was a great episode of WNYC’s Radiolab called “Emergence,” and it is basically about the idea that the work of many almost always turns out to be superior to the work of any individual. There’s an experiment where if you have a whole class of kids try to guess how many pieces of candy are in a jar, the average guess will usually come closer than any single guess. Such is the case with opinions as well. This is why a website like Rotten Tomatoes works so well for me, or even our user ratings in the new Comics section here. Any one reviewer is really a crap shoot, because of the reasons mentioned above, but an average of opinions is usually frighteningly right on. Opinion is also not the same thing as sales. I believe people tend to buy things they don’t love, but just like. Just because a movie is #1 at the box office over a weekend, doesn’t mean that everyone thought it was a great film, but rather, it was just there, and good enough. Those films tend to make a ton of money, but no one’s complaining that they’re overrated.
This is why, and please forgive me for the implied vanity, I think our show works fairly well, and why I enjoy doing it so much. Ron, Conor and myself are not the same people by any stretch of the imagination. We all have completely different views, and through some exceptional stroke of luck and chemistry, the combination of our opinions is far more valuable than any one of our opinions. Sure, there’s a good chance that over time, you’ll figure out that one of us is closest to your opinions, but the strength of the whole is that balance to ensure you’ll be getting a well rounded opinion of a book. 
But what about when the prevailing opinion is that a sub-par book is a great work? The best example of that with me is probably Craig Thompson’s Blankets. Everyone loves Blankets. I doubt it broke any sales records, but that’s a book I hear about time and again as an amazing piece of work. Me? I didn’t really like it that much. It just didn’t connect with me. Does that mean it’s overrated? Perhaps, specifically to me it is, but I’m not willing to go out and tell the people who love that book that they’re wrong. More than likely, they’re right, and it’s just me who doesn’t get it. If people love Blankets, I’m certainly in no position to say it’s overrated, am I? I don’t think so. If you catch me doing it ever, please let me know.
If you ever hear a musician say that The Beatles are overrated, their music is either going to be the most brilliant thing you’ve ever heard, or the worst. But more likely, it’ll be the latter. When someone says something is overrated, they’re saying “I didn’t get it, and everyone else must be wrong.”? Why would you want to listen to that opinion? Wouldn’t you rather hear their honest “I didn’t get it,”? or just “I didn’t like it”?? Maybe that’s just my opinion.
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Subscribe to our RSS Feed
Some rights reserved.
Great Article. I’ve used the word to describe the Watchmen as "overrated" before. It was mostly because everyone told me this would be my favorite graphic novel of all time, when it was not. Alan Moore is not the type of writer for me. He uses techniques I find to be counter productive to the story sometimes.
The worst part of the word overrated is part of what you said is that it’s an excuse that you didn’t like something, which is partially true, but in my case it’s taken as I hate everything Moore does. This train of logic seems to be true with certain writers, Moore and Morrison especially from personal experience. However when it comes to Moore, I enjoyed V for Vendetta a lot and if I read Watchmen without reading the pirate story or the Dr. Manhattan part, I do enjoy it. In other words it proves you right overrated can be used in place of disliking something.
I also realized that I am really bad about saying something is overrated. Reading this article has brought it to my attention, mostly because you used the two best arguements to me, Watchmen and Blankets. One book I thought was "overrated" while the other I really enjoyed.
Well played good sir.
THANK YOU! I suppose it is just part of human nature, but why do people feel that in order for their opinion to be valid, that the opposing opinon must be wrong? This is why I get most of my comics news from iFanboy and not the other sites filled with pompous guys who all think they can do a better job themselves. In comparison, I’d like to see a matching column about books or runs that you loved but the rest of the comic world disdains.
Now can someone please explain to me what made "Citizen Kane" so great?
Oh that would be a good article from all three to see things that they really enjoyed that other people didn’t. I mean they kind of did that with the totebag episode of the video, but that was books that the others didn’t like. Which if you haven’t watched NJBaritone, it’s quite funny.
I always think this same thing when people say "______ sucked. It was a terrible book/comic/movie." I mean sometimes it’s simply just true, but more often than not it’s just the reviewers biased opinion. It just gets on my nerves when people portray their opinion as fact, and also portray the collective opinion of others as simply stupid. One of my roommates does this all the time, and the most egregious example I’ve seen recently was Keith Law’s blog on which he purports to review literature. He reviewed Watchmen, didn’t give it an honest shot, said it sucked, and that if this was the best comics had to offer then he felt comfortable ignoring the medium altogether. Now this might be an extreme case, but it’s more or less how I feel about any person who gives their OPINION about a subject who just disregards popular opinion, and basically says that all others are stupid if the enjoyed _______. I agree Josh, it’s a pet peeve of mine too.
The thing is, that when you experience that disappointment in something that others seem to have enjoyed, it’s easy to figure that either you – or everyone else – missed something. And given that choice, most of us are going to decide it’s everyone else. I recently watched a movie that I felt was a waste of 2 hours, and then spent another half hour looking for some review that would validate my opinion. It’s that feeling of "Am I alone on this?"
This article is overrated….:)
I don’t get it, Josh. Isn’t that what the word Overrated is intended for? Isn’t it a one word summation of "Everyone likes this piece of work, but I don’t feel it’s worth the praise (for whatever reason)"?
As an aging punkrock enthusiast, I often find most of popular music today to be over-rated. Sorry for any fans out there, but let’s take the easy target, Britney Spears. I feel that she, even at the top of her game, was completely over-rated, and it doesn’t bother me to say it, not because I want to insult anyone else’s opinion, but because her being over-rated is MY opinion. Same with ridiculous reality television, like Survivor or whatever the new fad might be.
Even though I LOVED Blankets (I connected with it in more then one way on a personal level), I respect that you might find it over-rated, cause all you’re saying is "I didn’t enjoy it as much as everyone else".
Does that make sense?
@NJBaritone- Citizen Kane is awesome because you have to watch it through the filter of the time period that it was made. For a movie made before 1940, it sure does hold a lot of cinematic styles that tons of filmmakers use today.
I think the word "overrated" has evolved over the years. What used to be used as a way to describe something that you had high expectations for has morphed into this beast that’s used as a flippant slam against any sort of art medium. I think the Internet is really to blame for this only because there’s no filter for what and how people can say things. I like to think positively, so I like to think that those of us that are smart, well rounded inviduals know how to act while the dumb pricks of the world mouth off about whatever they want. And us smart people know when to ignore them.
Any Avengers book: overrated.
Yeah, @Neb, I think alot of it has to do with how the word is presented. "Gawwd, it was just so stoopid and over-rated" is loads different then someone is just stating their opinion intelligently.
I can’t stand reviews where someone just says "it was just retarded and everyone who likes it is dumb". pretty much like the stuff you see in the comments section over on a very popular geeksite.
it’s why I like this site so much: actual conversation.
Amen, Josh, great article.
Some people don’t like chicken. Doesn’t mean chicken’s bad.
Hm.
I’m going to be chewing on this one for a while.
Of course, I can always be wrong, or a piece of art can simply fail to connect with me. But is there no objective Good, or objective Bad? Is the Goodness or Overratedness of a thing determined by consensus? Because "Rico Suave" was a huge hit. Is it consensus plus time? Is it not ever possible, ever, that everybody else has just gone nuts and taken leave of their senses, and I am a lone voice in the wilderness?
I don’t have an answer, but I find myself thinking about the tale of "The Emperor’s New Clothes." I think there are circumstances when an opinion becomes the common opinion because people start to feel like it’s what they’re "supposed to" say. I know there’s at least one of the vaunted, sacred classics of the medium that I find to be a turgid, pretentious grind, but you’ll never hear me say which one because I don’t feel like wearing the dunce cap and being kicked to the outskirts of the village. Critical mass is a double-edged sword, I think.
I will be pondering this one for the rest of the day. Kudos for the thought-food.
When I hear something that is widely considered to be a masterpiece is "overrated," it tends to make sense to me because certain things, like Watchmen, Dark Knight Returns, Citizen Kane, etc. reach mythical proportions sometimes. I love Watchmen. Love it. It is one of the trades I would give anyone who seemed open to comics. However, some people revere it as if it changed the course of U.S. history and made all other comics worthless. Maybe this will make more sense: Watchmen=10/10 and very good comics that come out every now and then = 8/10 or 9/10. Sometimes when people talk about Watchmen, they will elevate Watchmen to 25/10, while still leaving those other comics at 8/10 or 9/10.
That said, I don’t call stuff overrated for the reasons Josh wrote about. I have no interest in Sandman, even after trying to read it several times. Many people loooooooooove it, so it is rated just perfectly in their eyes. When they try to convince me of how good it is, that’s when they start amping up their own rating.
Oh, excellent. I recall saying that I hoped you’d write this article, when you mentioned the subject a while back.
In addition to your excellent points, the "overrated" assessment bothers me because it doesn’t seem to take into account why something is ‘rated’ high in the first place. In the case of ‘Watchmen,’ or The Beatles or ‘Citizen Kane,’ there’s a level of innovation in the work that’s not always easy to appreciate, looking back on it.
This doesn’t mean that everything with a strong reputation is great, but it’s at least worth considering why this work is important to a lot of people before writing it off.
I love the Emergence radiolab episode. As for the topic at hand, I have never liked the term overrated myself. It does come off people trying to make themselves seem more tuned in to the real world that everyone else and frankly it’s always annoyed me. No offence to those who like the term, but it seems currently thats only JohnnyDestructo.
I’m glad to see I haven’t been alone in this all these years.
A lot of thought is being put into this discussion, but I think it’s kind of scary that so many here basically reach the extreme conclusion that NO ONE SHOULD SAY ANYTHING IS OVERRATED. There is an undertone in most of this discussion that "the masses are never wrong", and that’s scary.
I think we should evaluate critics and criticism the same way we evaluate works of art: if the content appeals to us then we accept it, if we can empathize so much the better. But if the critic or the art simply innerves us–even if it offends us–that can also be a good thing. As a scholar, much of the best criticism I’ve read is brainy stuff that I don’t agree with, yet I can see that it is so well-written that I can learn from it nonetheless. Obviously criticism such as "___ sucks" does not fall into this category, but overeagerness to dismiss negative or dissenting criticism just so we can all be happy… is scary.
I think Brian Bendis is overrated (even though I loved his Daredevil). I don’t think that people who like him are "wrong" for liking him, but I’m not "wrong" for thinking the 23 Avengers books are as great as many people say There is no "right" or "wrong" about art! I think the presumption that there IS a right way to criticize art misleads a lot of people. I feel this entire discussion (however thoughtful or well-written) is really just a very long rationalization of insecurity about maybe being "wrong".
Caring so much about what other people think is overrated. Curtailing your own opinions to not offend anyone else’s–also overrated. The real problem isn’t armchair critics who say "___ sucks" or "___ rulez!" or "___ is overated!" or "___ you! Nothing is ‘overrated’!" The real problem is the reluctance of getting out of our comfort zone and trying to understand why someone else may feel different than we do.
The real problem is that people use the term "overrated" like it is the basis of a criticism. Overrated is really just somthing that should be a conclusion after looking at all the reasons why a book is rated.
no offense taken, @thisisegan, but thankfully it’s not just me!
Whew, i was worried for a second.
Though that’s kind of my point. Even if I’m the ONLY person in the world who approves of "over-rated", that’s ok. if everyone here thinks that the term over-rated is over-rated, it’s ok for me to think that thinking over-rated is over-rated is over-rated! (good luck figuring THAT out!)
Generally when something is agreed upon by a large group of people, it automatically makes me take a step back and think about the difference between "group opinion" and "mob mentality". there are aLOT of people who just shout about something or critique something a certain way because OTHER people are doing the same.
Isn’t it possible that something is so well regarded in part because of a "band-wagon" effect?
I have no problem with anyone’s critiques as long as it’s presented in a respectful way.
I disagree. I use the term overrated a lot, but when I do, I don’t mean that the opinion of everyone who has rated something so highly is wrong, I mean their opinion is wrong for me.
For example, like jstump said, everyone said The Watchmen would be a 10, the greatest book ever. When I read it, I’d give it about a 7 – good, not great. I thought it was clearly a pioneer in a lot of areas, but that a number of books have done as good or better in those areas since. I also didn’t care for Moore’s writing style. Is anyone’s opinion wrong? No, but to me the book has been overated, and to you I have underrated it. That’s how ratings work.
Another example, in a different field, is Mario Galaxy. I remember reading one review that gave it like a 1 out of 10. I personally disagreed with everything he said, and thought he massively underrated the game. On the other hand, lots of reviews gave it a 10, and I felt that this was a slight overrating. To me, the game was about an 8.5-9, very good, boardering on great, but not quite.
Some other things that are overrated in my opinion: Halo, good, fun, definitely not a 10; sea food, don’t care for most of it, really hate oysters; sports, don’t understand the fanatical following of teams; reality TV, American Dancing with the Survivors is the worst trifecta ever and in my opinion is the cause for 90% of the worlds problems; CSI, meh.
The problem with ratings is that they will never 100% match your own opinions. One of the things I like so much about iFanboy, especially the podcast, is that you guy’s don’t really "rate" books. You talk about them, say if you liked them or not and why. I don’t even really remember an occasion where you’d specifically said "go out and buy X", other than the buying guides of course. And when you talk about a book that I haven’t read, and say you like it and why, and if it sounds appealing to me, I go out and get it. Sometimes, our opinions match. I love Fear Agent, Invincible, Dynamo 5, Godland, and Checkmate, and I likely never would have found these without iFanboy. On the other hand, our opinions slightly different on the afore mentioned Watchmen. And I’m sure as I continue listening and picking up books you talk about, I’ll eventually find something I absolutely hate. But I’ll still respect your opinion, even though you overrated it.
"Overrated" is totally valid term when used in the proper context. For instance, let’s say the "Lobster Boy" comic has a reputation for a groundbreaking comic-art style. I read it and the art looks just like the "Fred Barnes: Attorney For The Damned" one-shot that was released two years ago. I say the art in "Lobster Boy" is overrated. That’s valid.
I do love a good discussion.
Great article, although I was kinda put off in the beginning of the paragraph about blankets. That first sentence felt out of place probably more for its wording than anything else. You were defending the differences in opion in the beginning of the article and then with that one sentence you seemed to say, "well what if everyone likes something that isn’t good," rather than, "what if everyone likes a book that I didn’t?" The former leaves no room for difference. It is just "sub-par" as you said. I know it seems knit-picky because you reestablished the tone of the article later in the paragraph, but i just had to say something.
@TopGun – I see what you’re saying, but at least I think I got my point across, even if I muddled it a bit. You’re probably right, but it’s up there now, so I’ll have to live with it.
Thanks.
This is why every critic may want to start with the phrase, "In my opinion." That solves the whole problem.
I’d prefer "if you disagree with what i’m about to say, i’ll junkpunch you."
I think that the problem with "overrated" (and it is way overused) is when it is – as Thomas Katers said – the sum total of the critque. It has become a lazy shorthand for a dissenting opinion.
I do like the "Emporer’s New Clothes" analogy – but I think there is a big difference between something that has critical acclaim and something that is just wildly popular. Just because a book sells big and has lots of internet buzz, it doesn’t necessarily make it good – but when people I respect like the iFanboys recommend something, I am more willing to give it a chance. But when I come across a recommended book (i.e. Checkmate) or a creator (i.e. Chaykin) that I don’t enjoy, I don’t think dismissing those who DO enjoy them serves any purpose.
For those who say they use the term to mean that the opposing opinion is not in agreement with their own, I think you are changing the inherent meaning of the word a bit.
I completely agree with that opinion, but I still can’t help but say that the Pirates of the Carribean movies were extremely overrated. I just hate the fallowing those movies have.
Oh, and I like what Connor just said too.
Call me a cynic, but the moral majority of comics readers is the last place I look for definitive conclusion. The readership hasn’t exactly turned out to be league leader in the Mensa draft…
Would have to agree with Conor, though.
It’s a word as lazily bandied about as any comparably resounding positives.
@Conor – Exactly. Just saying "I liked it," or "I didn’t like it" is lazy reviewing too. That’s why you guys get the big bucks. 🙂
@josh – I forgot to put how much I enjoyed the article. Though my comment seemed to end on a sour note i loved reading this post.
It really doesn’t have much to do with the creative process and qualities of a book. Writing, pacing, characterization, composition, linework, etc, etc….those are all caused directly by the creative team behind a book. "Overrated" is a reaction about a reaction. That doesn’t make it invalid, it just isn’t very descriptive if someone is actually curious about a piece of work.
The common complaint that a book is "overrated" usually has a lot to do with preconceptions of the book owing the reader something. Almost always the book is offering something than the person in demand from it, and rightly "doesn’t get" it. More often than not it is a blanket term used so that the person doesn’t have to produce any real criticism. I agree with the last point, that it is far more honest to for the detractor to allow that they just didn’t understand what people liked about the book in question, than to claim it is "overrated".
But that said, the term can used to equally pretentious and benign ways. More often than not it is benign, poor phrasing on the user’s part.
And, I’m sure its been already said: General praise for something is hardly telling of the worth of a book. In the argumentative world its called "appeal to majority" and it is a logical fallacy. 😉
If it is no possible to be "overrated", that seems to imply that bad literature doesn’t exist.
@Muady – How does that imply that bad literature doesn’t exist? That would only be the case if everything were rated, on average, highly. And that’s certainly not the case.
Yea, sorry, I was thinking about the paragraph that starts with that statement as a whole, not the statement itself. Josh talked about dislike for a "good" book as not "connecting" to material even though it is widely perceived as good. If we want to be consistent, we have to assume the idea applies all across the board, not just for works widely percieved as good. . .but also bad.
If you’re just going to discard the dislike as the reader’s problem, not the book’s, where does bad literature come from?
It is difficult for me to wrap my head around his idea of the a book’s value, really. Especailly when a "connection" of mine to a book isn’t something I find necesary in order for a book to have value.
Interesting article Josh, I agree with a lot of what you said, but I do feel that the term overrated has to apply to some things, even if the consensus is that its great. A lot of times you’ll have certain movies or comic books that people will say are great or revolutionary, just because they’ve heard that about them or they think that, "if everyone thinks its great, it must be." Sometimes the reputaion of something will consume the popular opinion of it, until it goes from very good to timeless, never looking back. For example, I personally like The Matrix and think its a fine movie, but by no means do I think it deserves the praise and immitation that I’ve seen for it over the last few years.
Smart observations there.
Maybe you guys should create a Classic rating section. For Preacher, Sandman, Watchmen, DKR and so forth. Let the public speak!
@hbkhumanity – you may not think that the matrix deserves to be held in such high regard but that is merely your opinion. Granted a lot of the immitation may come from people who are trying to cash in on the Wachowski’s (is that how you spell it?) style, but it’s also possible that there were some filmmakers who started thinking about action sequences in a different way, or thought about how to film shots differently. Are they then wrong to be affected as such? As the article said it’s all a matter of opinion. Even if you don’t think the film is deserving of praise that doesn’t mean it’s wrong for someone to be honest and say that they loved it.
All art is subjective to taste, be it comics, paintings, music, movies, etc. Let people enjoy what they enjoy. As long as they’re not hurting anyone, what’s the harm?
I know some people that really like ‘Batman & Robin’. But I don’t talk to them much.
The word overrated is used so often that it makes me want to grind my teeth. Either I like something or I don’t and that’s it. I believe tha people like to call something overrated because they hear a certain number of key words in a conversation and they want to express their "controversial" point of view.
All I say is "like it" or "didn’t like it" and move on. I really don’t give a damn about how many people really gushed on about a single comic. I do like to hear reviews beforehand, but I’m not someone who gives a shit about dialing into the hive mind, joining majority opinion.
Does Hype counts as overrating?
Because when I read editorial annoucements saying that X book will be The New Watchmen or Y book will break the internet in half. Only to find that, even though good books, they’re like many other books in the market (and not precisely watchmen).
I understand those are stratagems to sell books like crazy, but sometimes I’ve thought: Well, this was overrated.
Of course art is subjective, but if everything is a matter of opinion then is anything really good or bad? Sure it is. I’m all for people having an opinion, but sometimes if something is really good and someone doesn’t like, just they’re plain wrong.
Judging anything based on its artistic merit (or lack of) is a slippery slope. Whatever medium you want to critique, be it: Movies, books(comics or otherwise), music, poetry, theater is all subjective to the viewer/reader. There is no good or bad when dealing with art. There is popular and unpopular but no good or bad. I’m in the minority of people that thought that Watchmen, Star Wars, and The Matrix were overrated. It’s my opinion and I’m entitled to it and it is no less valid than anyone else’s. In my opinion, when people have a problem with other people calling something they hold dear to them "overrated", they tend to take it as some sort of personal attack. "Hey man! WTF! What do you mean that "X" was overrated! What the hell does that say about me and my personal taste!" It’s actually kind of fun to see them get all worked up sometimes….OK, most times. People are wayyyy too sensitive these days. I blame the goddamn hippies!
The thing with art critique is that there’s a very thin line between being the kid who yells "THE EMPEROR IS NUDE", to becoming the crazy guy on the street with a sign that says THE END IS NEAR (and no one can see it but myself)
Maybe not art critique itself but art denouncement.
I don’t think "overrated" means something isn’t good or that I didn’t get it. I think it just means that it’s not necessarily as good as everyone claims. I also think there is a lost distinction between an importance of a work and the quality of a work. Importance does not automatically equal awesomeness and being new isn’t necessarily good. A lot of things get more credit than they deserve than being better than whatever was available at the time; that doesn’t mean their status is unassailable as time goes on.
There are better comics than Watchmen. There are better bands than The Beatles. There are better movies than The Godfather (1 or 2, it doesn’t matter). All of these things are good (even great; shit I certainly enjoy all this stuff), but there’s better stuff out there now.
Nothing is perfect and, over time, nearly everything gets improved upon.
I think that people love to speak in hyperbole, saying that something is "the best thing I’ve ever read" when it’s a little less than that.
Outside of comics, I heard that Superbad was the most hilarious movie of the year, and it wasn’t that for me. It had its hilarious moments, but I think there are movies like Old School that are funnier.
Sure it may be late but I will add my comment.
I guess I disagree with Josh’s comment "I don’t think it’s really possible for something to be overrated".
The saying is a statement about "group think" and how an individual’s opinion can be influenced by outside opinions vs rather than formed on its own merits. So when someone says something has been overrated they are commenting that they believe others have been greatly influenced by others and not the material.
Let me just add my two cents annd slink back quietly into the night.
I think the basic gist here is people shouldn’t see their own opinions as the be-all and end-all of art. Whether the term "overrated" itself means to each of us of a term that’s personal and subjective or absolute and broad-sweeping, I think the primary idea here is that nobody should see their opinions as "right" and others as "wrong." Case in point, I do not like Watchmen. I’ve read it. I’ve understood it. I’ve got why people like it. I didn’t enjoy it nor did I think very great. Now, other people think it’s the greatest thing ever and I’m okay with that. Both I and those people have as much right to our tastes as anyone else. Art is subjective by nature and any piece’s quality is determined by the eye of the beholder.
I will say that I don’t think people should feel something is wrong with them if they don’t like something a lot of other folks like. If you find that Watchmen or Sinestro Corps War or Sandman isn’t deserving of its hype, then that’s perfectly fine. If someone is of the opinion that some heralded work isn’t all that great, I don’t think we should say that person didn’t get it or that person is wrong or anything to that extent. It just means that person didn’t like it and that’s fine.
As far as the term ‘overrated" goes, I do believe it’s inheritantly subjective term, given the actual rating of art as good or bad is fairly subjective by nature in the first place.