MovieChat Forums > RRR (Rise Roar Revolt) (2022) Discussion > How did this get such a high score?

How did this get such a high score?


While it is well made technically it is so silly it is laughable... Which I could understand if it was supposed to be an over the top comedy but it isn't.

reply

the same reason the ip man movies get a high rating. there's so many asians, and they all vote it up at once. same here. there's 1.38 billion indian people that can vote it up.

reply

This^

When I was first making my way through IMDb's Top 250, it never ceased to amaze me at how bad the Indian films were that were on there. 3 Idiots, Like Stars on Earth, and Dangal being the highest-rated ones. Each of these was massively corny, over-the-top, and predictably formulaic. Their quality is on par to a "very special episode" of an 80s sitcom (several even include a hacky freeze frame at the end, as if to emphasize this point). These films make the soap operas my grandma used to watch look like Schindler's List, yet they are (if anyone goes by IMDb) the best of what India has had to offer.

It's jaw-dropping that anyone could think these films would even surpass movies like The Mighty Ducks or The Other Sister in their quality, let alone classics like Casino, There Will Be Blood, Unforgiven, Yojimbo, Gone with the Wind, Fargo, and many others. But they rank higher than all of them. And India having a massive population of people where bad taste is apparently the norm is the only logical explanation that I can fathom that could explain it.

reply

Just rip that bandaid off and admit you don't like brown people

reply

🙄

reply

How comes that shitty and whiny Merican movies about the Vietnam War, celebrating so called "heros" losing against a 3rd world country get such high ratings?
Guess what? There are DIFFERENT cultures on this planet and your's isn't the dominating one...

reply

How comes when someone criticizes the hammy and cheesy production and presentation of any "'Merican" movie or television series, where such hacky issues are present, these opinions aren't instantly dismissed as simply being a product of some sort of prejudice or bias? As implied in my previous post, I could make these same arguments about most soap operas and 80s sitcoms, and nearly everyone would agree that, yes, obviously the writing, performances, and filmmaking in these things are objectively formulaic, clearly corny, and laughably melodramatic (because they usually are). However, point this out about Bollywood films, which habitually embody all of these exact same elements (with the added bonus of people breaking out into song and dance, with on-the-nose lyrics every few minutes), then suddenly hackiness is magically not considered hacky anymore. It's "culture." lol Give me a break.

reply

These movies are made because they are successful in India. Because they meet the expectations there much better than Top Gun Maverick does . Unbelievable, isn't it?

reply

Yes... and? lol

As I stated, these films contain numerous elements that most would consider to be negatives when included in any other film/TV series (regardless of the country of origin). It's the stuff soap operas, sitcoms, and pornos are made of and made fun of over. There's no argument that people in India seem to enjoy this schlock in large numbers. That, however, doesn't result in it ceasing to be schlock.

reply

It's so bad. I guess this is what those audiences are culturally used to, and more sophisticated Western critics don't want to sneer at it because they will be called racist.

reply

Indian nationalism.

And, for some reason, people who are unfamiliar with Indian movies, and can't recognize what's good in actual good Indian movies, seem drawn to the novelty of what's bad in bad Indian movies like this one. It's like they've never seen an Indian movie before, and they're intoxicated by the over-the-top-ness. Whereas is they were familiar with Tollywood/Bollywood, they would just see it as another mess.

I think another factor is that these unfamiliar/non-Indian critics imagine that they dislike Indian movies for their love songs and dances. Here's a movie with less of that, and they find it to their taste.

reply

I turned it off after an hour. Why is it is so silly yet 3 hours long? Just couldn't get into it at all and I was really trying. For a 3 hour film you have to get me invested into the world, the characters and the drama (a recent excellent example of a film that did this superbly was The Batman) and I think this film did a poor job of doing that.

Fair enough if people enjoy this but definitely not my cup of tea.

reply

Same here. I only made it about a half hour before turning it off. Shame as I was looking forward to it, having heard many great things. The set pieces were nice, but the filmmaking/editing/pacing/writing was laughably bad, and the ridiculously over the top racist depiction of the British, complete with exaggerated accents, monstrous, plastic-surgery and makeup-laden faces, and near perpetual mustache-twirling sinister behavior of anyone not Indian was too much for me. Absolute garbage.

I don't know what was more ridiculous, the action set pieces, or this film's depiction of white people. Just unwatchable. No wonder it's been nominated for best foreign film, though. The Academy loves to self-flagellate.

reply

So you're English? You have a problem with the English being seen as the bad guys in the past in the eyes of India?

reply

[deleted]

I have a problem with an entire group of people being made into cartoonishly over the top villains for no other reason than to demonize them in the eyes of viewers, yes. You don't?

reply

So you have zero skin in the game then?

Don't be so touchy. I'm from England and have no qualms about my ancestors being made fun of. They invaded and occupied India. We were the bad guys.

Let them have their fun, get it out of their system.

It's nothing to do with me, I wasn't part of it, so I don't have a problem.

Now, on the other hand, The Woman King travesty and the Dahomey Nazis I do have a problem with. This I don't because we were the bad guys.

It's no worse than the Nazis being made into caricatures, or the Russians as we see in many, many Hollywood movies since the cold war. Or basically, anybody that is not from the good old US of A. Other countries have been free game in Hollywood for a good while now.

So let the Indians have their time making fun of their old oppressors.

You must be seething at Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins!

reply

Honestly, I found the god awful filmmaking to be more offensive than any off-putting portrayal of white people. I just couldn't make it past the half hour mark, and I really tried. It's just a ridiculous, over the top, unpleasant film that I really couldn't get into, and I really wanted to.

reply

I agree that the cartoon British were the worst part of the film. It was a little too over the top, and the acting was terrible.

reply

I don't understand all the high praise for this either. Don't get me wrong it's fun in parts and the action sequences are hilariously over the top, but at 3 hours there are so many parts of this that are just excessive and tiresome.

reply

Because the writing is pretty great. The visual storytelling beats anything I've seen in years. More moments and story are told without dialogue, which makes for great cinema. A refreshing change from having Basil Exposition walking on screen to explain everything like we do in the majority of Hollywood films now. Visual storytelling. Tons of it. Show don't tell. Guide with visuals do not shout at the screen.

The story, the acting and the performances from the leads.

The action is engaging, well-told visually, and entertaining as F. Way better than anything Hollywood is putting out there despite its flaws in CGI.

The directing. Probably the hardest film to make as a director this year along with Everything, All at Once.

Should have been nominated for best movie, and best director. Fablemans you should be complaining about.

And from the comments I see above that claim this is mediocre, bland Indian cinema compared to its contemporaries. I may just stop watching movies from the USA, and solely watch Indian cinema if this is considered trite and tripe compared to other Indian movies.

reply

[deleted]

While it is well made technically it is so silly it is laughable...

It's supposed to be. It's literally a thing that it's entertaining and also be able to make you laugh at the absurdity of it. It's not like that by accident.

I don't know what's wrong with some modern cinema audiences - It's like the criticism of daft "unrealistic" stunts in the F&F movies or of the raised eyebrow entertainment of Sir Roger Moore's Bond films.

These films are / were massively successful because they have these elements. The directors are aware of it, the audiences are aware of it.

It isn't some secret code like some numpties seem to think they're they've cracked. Newsflash assholes - They were 100% designed the way they are, they didn't bumblingly make them that way by accident. You're no genius film fan for working out they are exactly as they're meant to be.

reply