The #metoo movement was in response to decades (centuries? millennia?) of abuse being basically unaddressable. It's totally fair to call it an overcorrection, but a correction was still needed. Are abusive accusations okay? Of course not, but there are far few stories of abusive accusations than accused with many accusers. Reverting to never believing accusers is just the status quo throughout human history, which is what metoo was an overcorrection to. It's just kicking the can.
This is one of those things that is obviously true but goes a pale grey and fades away from view because people are uncomfortable being confronted with obvious truth.
I don't think it is fair to call #metoo an overcorrection. An overcorrection would imply the pendulum swung too far in the other direction, and it just didn't.
There was one high-profile trial, of a man who was definitely guilty. A bunch of other accused people faced zero consequences. In total, the #metoo movement raised awareness and was dwarfed by its own backlash.
An overcorrection would be what people fear-monger about: men arrested for innocently holding doors open, etc. None of that happened.