Books are good when you don’t realise you are reading.
Any film that makes you realise you are watching a film (bad sets, acting, dialog etc.) is bad.
Enshrining illiteracy is a proud American tradition.
Yes. This is why I hate movie critics. Your PhD in post romantic Spanish literature does not qualify you to make a determination if the power rangers movie was good or not.
That’s why I watch video essays that are longer than the actual movie and explain why it’s bad instead of watching the movie
Sounds like someone who never watched House of the Dead in theatres.
I too have no media literacy
I’m often very enamored by camera work, type of shot and things like how they translate certain things to film with limited options.
Especially when it’s Drama related and has to do with heavier emotions or things like disorders and other issues.
But usually i’m just a: “watched movie, had fun” kinda guy.
I watched a stoner movie a while back about some guys that got stranded in their van and hotboxed their asses back or forward(can’t remember) 30 years…as an avid non drug user i had fun but i did think it was a shit movie tho.
Know how to tell of a person is a movie snob? They’ll tell you.
Basically linux users
First of all, the term is actually ‘cinephile’. And second… 😄
I’m exactly like that, but the other way around. 90 % of the movies I watch I don’t enjoy. Mayhap it’s just not my medium. Makes the 10 % I did enjoy realy worth it tough.
If the movie is not Extremely Good™ (or better), I get extremely irritated and will walk out of the theater or click on something else. Just feels like a huge waste of time
Depression is one factor, but I also realized that what Hollywood thinks a “relatable” character is is very far from who I am as a person.
Film is a medium that is truly coming to its technical maturity while also being at or near the absolute height of our artistic powers as a civilization. That’s why it really sucks that at that same moment, studios are more risk-adverse and money driven than ever.
I didn’t want to be a film snob, but I feel like I have to go indie these days to see anything worth my time.
Same thing with video games. I mainly play indie games and if you combined the budget and staff of all of them, it still wouldn’t come close to the budget and staff of a AAA game. So much more creativity is allowed thought. A single vision rather then a design by committee.
Oh, hundy p. The closest thing in my library to AAA games are all Larian and From Soft titles from years ago. Indie is where it’s at.
Right?!? Another thing is that plot lines are reused a lot. Often movies feel so very shallow and to me.
The most recent movie I likes a lot was “Everything Everywhere All at Once”. That felt like something unique to me.
dude is stuck at a toddler level
I mean, I can certainly tell whether a movie is objectively good or bad while watching it, but that rarely correlates with my enjoyment of the movie. I can separate “this is really badly made/has bad writing/is a ridiculous premise” and “this is a fun distraction from the daily routine”.
I kind of feel like being unable to make that separation and not being able to enjoy movies that are “bad” must be an exhausting and miserable experience.
Its a very mature and peak enjoyer mindset to be able to separate objectively good from bad AND being able to not feel bad about enjoying the good movie and enjoying the bad one.
Im bored to death watching marvel movies that are objectively kinda good but we had a blast watching only god forbids despite me reccomending people not watch it.
Saying this as a massive Bruce Campbell fan (i.e. I really enjoy “bad” movies).
While doing anything you can’t enjoy would be “exhausting”, I assume people who dont enjoy “bad” movies just… don’t watch them.
I don’t think camp is the same thing as bad. I’ve seen things that are very campy, but still manage to have compelling character arcs.
It’s the issue I had with the Bayformers movies. Having over the top special effects wasn’t an excuse for all the characters being rotten.
Evil Dead on the other hand bought fake blood by the barrel, but Ash’s decent into madness was the real focus of the story.
Another example, Rocky Horror Picture Show. Certified classic; it’s doing exactly what it wants to do. Is not trying to win Best Picture, and that’s what’s great about it
Evil Dead is one of the greats and easy to love, but I’m talking a genuine enjoyment of movies like Moontrap, Alien Apocalypse, and My Name Is Bruce.
The Bayformers are an interesting choice, because while I don’t enjoy them myself, I’ve heard people actively enjoy the movies for the spectacle. Similar to how I have enjoyed some of the… less well written… Godzilla films. Folks are gonna enjoy what they enjoy.
I was about to say, I remember watching movies in childhood that I enjoyed the experience of, but did not take on board. It was a series of lights and sounds. I rate those films Stimuli/10.
I 100% get this and I think a lot of people are missing the point. It’s like going to a football game without knowing the rules, which team is better, or who is winning and having fun anyway. It’s not having fun watching people suck because shitty football can be funny.
Some movies (Marvel, Fast and Furious, Transformers) are Pepperoni Pizza. They are not a 7 course dining experience because THEY DIDNT SET OUT TO BE!
If you sit down to a pizza and tell me its the worst soup you ever had, you’re a dumbass.
It’s not even about does this movie live up to the hype or type of movie or does it tell the story well. It’s there is a giant tv in front of me, stuff is happening on it, I’m with friends, there are snacks, I’m not even sure who’s who, what’s going on, or even what language this is in, but I enjoyed doing that we are doing this thing. It’s just the entertainment clears the absolute lowest bar. And I had fun doing that. The 10% not enjoying it is if something takes away from that like being sick or them being out of milk duds.
I don’t think this is proving the point that the people who say this want it to make. If you’re trying to champion what the movie is trying to be, then that’s one thing. (i.e. Marvel movies want to be fun, fast paced, action packed, and humorous)
But championing what a movie is not trying to be doesn’t really work. For example, saying that a movie isn’t trying have the traits that make a movie good (pacing, plot, framing, blocking, cut speed, color grading, etc), especially when all those elements are present simply by virtue of the medium.
That’s like saying a watch isn’t broken just because it doesn’t tell time. You can like a broken watch. It can be a fun fashion accessory. It can have a pleasing design or be comfortable on the wrist. But it still doesn’t tell time. And thats not a dig on those who like it, it’s just a true statement about the watch.
Movies can be fun bad tbh. They can have cheap budgets, horribly low quality CGI, but still be a fun watch.
Yea but this is telling the difference beyween a good and bad movie
Modern comedies have nothing on movies like asteroid-a-geddon, the shark side of the moon, or even the velocipastor.
Those movies slaps and are a guaranteed laugh!
Sharknado is also an all time classic
Valocipastor is a bona fide masterpiece. Quietly confident that the sequel will also be fun.
Oh hi Mark
Mario Bros. Dune.
Good movie: the one you enjoy
Bad movie: the one you don’t
Simple as that, my metric of scoring isn’t good or bad, it’s whether i enjoy it or whether it annoy me. I pick what i watch and will go through review and score so most of the time i know i gonna enjoy it, but sometime an outlier will pops up. I’m still not over how annoyed i am for 28 Weeks Later.
That assumes that enjoyment is the only metric, which is common, but not universal.
Some people can think the movie is of high quality, but the subject matter isn’t for them, as an example.
Think of it like food:
Good food: the food you enjoy
Bad food: the food you don’t
Unless you’re basing good and bad on how “healthy” the food is (for whatever given metric of health you want to use)
What you’re saying makes sense except that’s not what OOP was talking about. They weren’t asking what definition of “quality” to use.
Indeed, but my comment was a reply to another poster who was implying a specific metric.
I was just trying to point out that metric isn’t the same for everyone, even a composite metric will differ person to person
And that assuming “enjoyment” is a single metric, because in the matter of fact, it’s an overall score with the combination of everything the critics use. If i like it i like it, figuring it out why and justify it is part of the critics job.
If you wanna translate that into food, then the good food will taste good and bad food will taste horrible.
Yeah. Nobody enjoys watching Requiem for a Dream or Schindler’s List, they’re still top films.
And somebody who includes health in their metric of enjoyment will have a different threshold
Those aren’t “enjoyable”, but they are entertaining.
And imagine that, judging entertainment on how much they entertained you.
I mean hey, if you have low standards, and you’re completely honest about it, nothing wrong with that… and it also puts the onus on the people with higher standards to actually explain why they do or do not like any given movie, easier to suss out the people who don’t actually have consistent standards, but instead just have an amalgamation of their favorite influencers opinions.
Win win win as I see it. I’m a bit of a movie snob, and I can explain why I do or don’t like a movie…
But I am also self-aware enough to realize that other people have other standards, and 90% of the time, if there isn’t some utterly reprehnsible trope or caricature or very very misleading depiction of real events in a ‘based on a true story’ type thing… eh, whatever, we have different tastes, wanna get pizza?
I have a friend who can rant for hours about why he hates Rian Johnson and what he did go starters. I think all the movies are good, the first 6 for sure huge nostalgia but I like the newer ones too.
Knives Out is a great movie
Brick is a masterpiece
Whether you had fun and the quality of the movie are not entirely related.
Often times I find that highly rated movies aren’t fun to watch. They follow the ‘good movie’ formula and it shows. I really only like comedy and action movies, personally, but don’t want every movie to follow the hero’s journey. I don’t need them all to be the tale of an underdog who really has the greatest power. I don’t need the camera framing to hint at who the antagonist is.
I just want to see the girl and her dog defeat Predator or James MacAvoy’s beastly terror in Split. If they happen to also include some of the formula, that’s okay but it certainly isn’t what made the movie good to me.
Says who? Is the whole point of movies not for you to have fun?
In the same sense the point of food is to get you full. There’s more nuance to it.
Great analogy. I’m going to use this next time someone tells me I should just ignore the shitty writing in self published books and have fun reading it.
Fuck you, I paid money for this, I get to bitch about why it sucks.
I’m sick of these elitists telling me it’s gross to eat nothing but five cans of refried beans, like, let people enjoy things!
I mean, nobody wants to admit they ate nine cans of ravioli, but I did. I’m ashamed of myself… The first doesn’t count. Then you get to the second, then the third. And the fourth, and the fifth I think I burned with a blowtorch. And then I just kept eating…
That’s why I find myself staring at a half eaten jar of green olives or an empty sleeve of crackers during the wee hours. Sometimes we just want to get to the point and not bother with the journey.
Sure, but if I enjoyed eating the food it was good food.
junk food is still junk food, even if you enjoyed it.
that was the point of the comparison in the previous comment.
the nutritional quality of food has little to do with your enjoyment of it.
Children of Men, good movie, not fun
What makes it good to you?
Also Pig, too autheur for me, not fun, but i still like it.
Evolution (2001) is an objectively bad movie.
It is also one of my all time favorites because it’s fun and doesn’t take itself too seriously.
Schindler’s List is an objectively good movie. It is decidedly not fun.
Some movies are intentionally not fun, because their message isn’t about fun things.
Leaving Las Vegas isn’t fun.
Nah movies are ranked on a set of objective criteria such variety and use of color, the use of varied angles, runtime:budget ratio, and so on. Technically speaking the best movies are usually produced by accidentally dropping a cellphone from a hot air balloon
And sticking the landing in a pig sty.
Thank you for this; best thing I’ve seen all week.
I think you should read my previous comment again.
One can have fun watching a bad movie. One can have no fun watching a good movie.
One can have no fun watching a good movie
Requiem for a Dream
Leaving Las Vegas
I had a lot of fun watching that. I played a drinking game where every time he took a drink, so did I.
How are you posting if you’re dead?
Such a perfect example. I had the opposite of fun watching that the first time but it’s still one of my favorite movies.
Dancer in the Dark
Schindler’s List is not a fun movie.
No idea why you’re getting downvoted. Did all the lemmings forget how to experience joy? If you like the art, it’s good art. That’s the whole point.
Movies are art, the point of art is to elicit emotion. If a movie does that, it’s probably a good movie.
Having fun is always a valid reason to watch a movie. And making a fun movie is a valid pursuit.
Buuuut at the same time movies can be more than just fun and some people really want that.
Expecting a movie to be more than just fun can lead to let downs.
Tl;Dr people take movies too seriously
Imo if it’s fun then it’s good, but being fun isn’t the only path to “goodness”. Lots of good movies out there that are the opposite of fun
Dancer in the Dark
