It's hard to deny that the vast majority of cinemaAmerican or otherwiseis going to be ridiculously overrated by a certain group of people. When that group is the actual American population itself, a lot of negative reviews like to label the said film as "The most overrated movie of all time!" The fact is, no matter if you or I like a film or not, almost everything gets more recognition than it deserves in America. Average movies are stretched out into "modern masterpieces" simply because of the utter lack of creativity or originality in cinema overall. It's much easier to force yourself to feel contentment in something you just wasted your time and money on than admit it was terrible. It's a common misconception to "look for the good in every film", rather than actually admit that you've seen/heard everything the film showed so many times you almost feel asleep or lost interest and made out with your girlfriend for 3/4ths of the movie, then call it a great film just because the critics did. Everything I just mentioned above could be the reason Fargo is so overrated. But if you want me to be honest, Fargo is so downright pathetic, no matter how hard I try, I can't figure out why it's overrated. At all. I just don't understand it.

I've seen reviews calling Fargo everything from the best movie of all time to a Shakespearian masterpiece. I read their reasoning, and I found it flat. I've watched big-name critics rave about Fargo, but even they failed to give a real reason it was so amazing. Basically, they all come down to: "Fargo was average, sure, but the humor gave it some life." And if that's the best they can think of, by their own logic, SpongeBob should be rated alongside The Godfather.

Based on a true story or not, there is nothing even remotely worth watching in Fargo. It has the same exact plot as you've seen on bad TV crime drams before, and it unfolds in exactly the same way. What's the point of making a movie about a true story if it's exactly like the countless fictional stories just like it? Fargo has no originality, and next to no creativity. Sure a few lines of dialogue are decent, but who really cares? Reviewing an entire movie based on a few lines is ludicrous. The dialogue and humor both aren't even that great. If anything, it reminds me of a severely watered-down Pulp Fiction wannabe.

Likewise, the heavy use of nostalgia is the sole reason this isn't playing on the women's channel instead of being called one of the best movies ever made. The Coen brothers rely heavily on nostalgia and soft-spoken characters to give off the faux sense of seeing something you haven't seen before. I always hear people calling a movie "manipulative" or "and insult to my intelligence" due to a plot twist or something that they didn't see coming. Though I usually find those types of people unintentionally hilarious, I'm going to go as far here as to say that Fargo is manipulative to the audience: it uses nostalgia to mask that it's really a dull, hollow shell. The plot is completely throw-away. A guy pays to have his wife kidnappedand weren't we all oh-so-shocked when that went wrong? For once, I'd like to see a movie where something like this goes RIGHT and everything thereafter plays out exactly as planned. That might be interesting. Fargo, however, takes the boring, safe route and does exactly as expected of it. By the closing credits, I literally asked myself out loud: "What was the point?"

I think I figured out the point. The point the Coen brothers were trying to make was that you could make the most typical movie ever, add a couple funny lines, and they'll be basking in wealth because of it. They probably even had a good laugh at the level of positivity regarding their pathetic film. Because, really, no one tries to find the faults in films anymore, just the good in everything. May I suggest that this is why we're watching Fargo and not a truly original, captivating film from these two skilled directors? If you love their crap, they're not going to waste the effort making gold.

1/10