AniNate Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Let's be honest, you have to acknowledge consensus. You just can't say a movie adored by millions and endorsed by the Library of Congress is bad without looking foolish, even if you didn't care for it much. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Jedi Master 007 Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 (edited) Also, on this whole objectivity vs. subjectivity debate:I think there is an objective approach to watching a film. By that, I mean, that there is a way to approach a film for what it is and not for what you want it to be. For example, I dislike horror. I hate being scared. But when I'm evaluating a horror movie, do I say it's bad because it made me afraid, and I dislike being afraid? Of course not, the entire goal of a horror film is to scare you, and since I know that, I evaluate it based on how well it accomplishes that goal, even though I dislike the effects of achieving that goal. In this way, I have ignored my preference (my dislike for being afraid) to evaluate the film.However, when it comes to that evaluation, it is subjective. What I mean is that when it comes to deciding what is scary and what is not, that is subjective. That is based on how I feel about the directorial choices made, but how I feel might not be how you feel. So, the opinion is always subjective.I hope that makes sense.Edit: To continue on this point. This is why you might enjoy Guardians of the Galaxy more, but find Boyhood to be a better film. You might love the lighthearted attitude of Guardians, but realize that compared to what it wants to be, it has weaknesses. Meanwhile, you might not enjoy the Boyhood experience as much because you don't like serious character-driven films as much as lighthearted-narrative driven films, (I'm assuming Boyhood is a serious character-driven film) however, you might realize that when it comes to serious character-driven works, few films have ever done it better than Boyhood.Again, I hope that makes sense. Edited August 17, 2014 by Dark Jedi Master 007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Panda Posted August 17, 2014 Author Share Posted August 17, 2014 Also, on this whole objectivity vs. subjectivity debate:I think there is an objective approach to watching a film. By that, I mean, that there is a way to approach a film for what it is and not for what you want it to be. For example, I dislike horror. I hate being scared. But when I'm evaluating a horror movie, do I say it's bad because it made me afraid, and I dislike being afraid? Of course not, the entire goal of a horror film is to scare you, and since I know that, I evaluate it based on how well it accomplishes that goal, even though I dislike the effects of achieving that goal. In this way, I have ignored my preference (my dislike for being afraid) to evaluate the film.However, when it comes to that evaluation, it is subjective. What I mean is that when it comes to deciding what is scary and what is not, that is subjective. That is based on how I feel about the directorial choices made, but how I feel might not be how you feel. So, the opinion is always subjective.I hope that makes sense.Edit: To continue on this point. This is why you might enjoy Guardians of the Galaxy more, but find Boyhood to be a better film. You might love the lighthearted attitude of Guardians, but realize that compared to what it wants to be, it has weaknesses. Meanwhile, you might not enjoy the Boyhood experience as much because you don't like serious character-driven films as much as lighthearted-narrative driven films, (I'm assuming Boyhood is a serious character-driven film) however, you might realize that when it comes to serious character-driven works, few films have ever done it better than Boyhood.Again, I hope that makes sense. Boyhood and Guardians are neck and neck for my favorite of the year. I preferred Guardians just because I love its humor style, it entertained me, it even moved me at points, the soundtrack was rocking awesome, and it immersed me into a goofy satirical world. I recognize there are some flaws in different departments though, but those flaws never really effected my opinion of the movie, it's one I could watch again and again and not get tired of. Boyhood was cinematic achievement on every level, and I loved the sporadicness, and it was as close to a technically flawless movie as you are going to get. It managed to truly give you little glimpses into the this kids life as he grows up and touch on universal themes and ideas. When it comes to pure film quality Boyhood is simply one of the best movies I have ever seen period. However, I do enjoy watching Guardians more, it is one of the most entertaining movies I have seen in a long time. I personally love big blockbusters that let you sit back, get immersed, and fall into a world of laughter and adventure while also bury some nuggets of gold that are its themes buried throughout. All of my favorite cinematic elements (character driven, satirical, strong effects, sci-fi, and creative) were present in it and were delivered strongly, despite its flaws I did personally enjoy it more than Boyhood (although they really shouldn't be compared at all). It's weird, but I find one to be the better movie and the other to be the one I personally like more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Peeks in thread.....decides not to participate. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 One small thing.....Rambo is a much better movie than Casablanca....Transformers is better than Citizen Kane. Prove me wrong. I'm out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 One small thing.....Rambo is a much better movie than Casablanca....Transformers is better than Citizen Kane. You can say that, but no one will take you seriously unless you back it up. The burden of proof is on the minority. In anything, not just movies. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil in the Blank Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Human Beings have always had a problem with objective vs subjective. If we side-step into the realm of morality for a second who is to say that helping an old lady across the street is more moral than punching her in the stomach and stealing her handbag? Why is one action considered 'good' and one action considered 'bad'? And I must say that at age 30 I really don't care anymore. If someone wants to argue that punching an old lady in the stomach is perfectly fine then let them have that opinion, I'm just glad I live in a society that will punish that action. Likewise if I filmed 200 people taking a shit and cut that into a 2 hour movie, and someone wants to call that movie better than Casablanca or even Transformers 4, and tell anyone who says their taste is rubbish that all taste is subjective, then let them. I really don't care anymore. I'll just keep on thinking that their taste is simply rubbish and to never listen to any opinion they ever have on film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil in the Blank Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 One small thing.....Rambo is a much better movie than Casablanca....Transformers is better than Citizen Kane. Prove me wrong. I'm out. Never change Baumer, Never Change. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAR Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Wait which Rambo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashrendar44 Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 (edited) You can say that, but no one will take you seriously unless you back it up. The burden of proof is on the minority. In anything, not just movies. This. Your opinion means zilch and rendered totally meaningless if you're unable to back it up. That's the basis of argumentating. So saying "Superman IV is better than The Third Man" is an absolute void of an opinion if that's all that is to your argument. It's you that got to prove your opinion is valid because nobody but you asked for that opinion. You're entitled to it but don't expect people to take you seriously if there's nothing else behind it. It's the first thing you learn about in philosophy class back in high school, opinion is the level zero of argumentation. It's a pre-conceived statement that argumentation and discourse will prove it right or wrong after examining facts. Edited August 17, 2014 by dashrendar44 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Stingray Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 I love it when you talk sexy, dash. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil in the Blank Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 I'm surprised Dash is in the right for once! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessie Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Since you're not distinguishing between film and movies (I'd argue movies exist solely to entertain while film exists to create art and many productions exist somewhere in the middle), I have to disagree. A purpose of a movie MAY be to entertain but if that's the whole purpose of a movie then it's going to be a shallow experience. The Dark Knight was a thrill ride, sure, but it also had something to say about surveillance and tactics aimed at fighting "wars on terror/crime". It also explored the very idea of what a hero is. Boyhood is entertaining but it was about capturing a very special time in a man's life. The Lego Movie is a fun movie throughout but what makes it special is the ending that redefines the stakes and the very conflict. An example of a really good fun movie that had nothing to say was Airplane so I'm not saying this is an indication of quality. Some films also don't care if they entertain you or not: art house films and a lot of productions where the purpose is to create something different. Some of these films can also be good. There's nothing wrong with having movies existing only for the entertainment factor-but the ones that are remembered have a purpose beyond that. Well films like Armageddon and ID4 may not be considered as 'good' movies but they are sure as a hell more remembered now than the last 10 best picture winners (with the exception of ROTK) so I have to strongly disagree with that) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Panda Posted August 17, 2014 Author Share Posted August 17, 2014 One small thing.....Rambo is a much better movie than Casablanca....Transformers is better than Citizen Kane. Prove me wrong. I'm out. Correction, you like Transformers more than Citizen Kane and Rambo more than Casablanca but Citizen Kane and Casablanca are the better movies. Neither Citizen Kane or Casablanca would be in my top 25 of purely favorite movies but I'd who let admit they're better than most if not all the movies in my top 25. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessie Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 (edited) Correction, you like Transformers more than Citizen Kane and Rambo more than Casablanca but Citizen Kane and Casablanca are the better movies.Neither Citizen Kane or Casablanca would be in my top 25 of purely favorite movies but I'd who let admit they're better than most if not all the movies in my top 25.See this just proved that it's all about subjection. The problem with many posters on this forum (myself included) is we make out that our own opinions are the right ones. I could say Bad Boys 2 is better than 12 years a slave and many would say I'm wrong. Instead lets just end every statement like the with 3 simple letters... IMO. People will argue their case to try and say you're wrong but at the end of the day, our own opinions determine what films are good or bad, no - one else's. Edited August 17, 2014 by jessie 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TServo2049 Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 (edited) Objective and subjective, love/like/dislike/hate vs. great/good/bad/horrible, are going to get mixed up and conflated. Even with my previous post, I will still admit this. I was going to make some mention of The Way We Were in my earlier post, in talking about films I *truly* consider to be overrated, and not just good films I don't like. But then I realized that unlike the other films I mentioned, my utter dislike for the film (too sentimental, I don't like Streisand, I'm not really a fan of Redford either, the hamfisted political stuff irritates me) truly clouds my ability to objectively pass judgment on it. My parents enjoy the movie, I do not.And speaking of my parents, while they were of the generation of that film's release, it's also important to know that they both absolutely DESPISE Love Story. They think it's a genuinely bad movie - but is that again just because they don't like it?I could also call Patch Adams or A Beautiful Mind "bad" or "overrated" out of my utter dislike of them...but again, are they? And on the subject of movies which I like that others call "bad", my family and I really enjoy Drop Dead Fred, my parents will actually say outright that it's a "good" movie, but just because we enjoy it, does that make it "good", and does that mean everyone who calls it "bad" is wrong?I'm not trying to speak from some high ground of "I'm above subjective judgment", I realize I'm just as driven by my opinions of certain films as everyone is... Edited August 17, 2014 by TServo2049 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowhite Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 See this just proved that it's all about subjection. The problem with many posters on this forum (myself included) is we make out that our own opinions are the right ones. I could say Bad Boys 2 is better than 12 years a slave and many would say I'm wrong. Instead lets just end every statement like the with 3 simple letters... IMO. People will argue their case to try and say you're wrong but at the end of the day, our own opinions determine what films are good or bad, no - one else's. Yes. You see, people will lay out the reasons Citizen Kane is the better film than Transformers. Stronger characterization, more involved and intelligent plot, historical relevance to cinema, better thematic depth, strong cinematography and editing that is focused and not scattershot like Transformers. Ok great, I'm sure many would agree with that. Yet...look at that list...you can't objectively define ANY of that. Stronger characterization? This is probably something I can show...check points of character depth, but does that makes it better? Other guy says...but those characters are fucking boring! Who cares if it's stronger if the characters are terrible! Rosebud can kiss my ass! Ok fine, more intelligent plot? Other guy says...so what? The plot was boring and unengaging. Pass. And who ever voted that having a stronger plot matters in the first place? A great film can be made...without a focused plot at all. Historical relevance to cinema? Birth of a Nation is historically relevant. Yeah. Ok you get my point. Even when you break things down...it's still rather subjective. Even something like cinematography...you can talk about rules of composition, yet a film could succeed by breaking all those rules to achieve something different. I could go on and on. But I won't, I want breakfast. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethan Hunt Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Correction, you like Transformers more than Citizen Kane and Rambo more than Casablanca but Citizen Kane and Casablanca are the better movies.Neither Citizen Kane or Casablanca would be in my top 25 of purely favorite movies but I'd who let admit they're better than most if not all the movies in my top 25.But what makes them good? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 The point that I was getting at was that it's easier to just argue from opinion when it's one shared by the majority of the audience. There will be less resistance if you say "The Godfather was the best movie of the 1970s" than there would be if you said "The Godfather is awful, worst film of the 1970s". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowhite Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 The point that I was getting at was that it's easier to just argue from opinion when it's one shared by the majority of the audience. There will be less resistance if you say "The Godfather was the best movie of the 1970s" than there would be if you said "The Godfather is awful, worst film of the 1970s". Well of course this is true. Many arguments about quality end up really discussing consensus and overriding public opinion. The issue we're having here is that people are taking this consensus and trying to call it objectivity. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
