Shoutistics
242,372
Total Shouts
21
Last 24 Hours
Leaderboard
The Shoutbox
Originally Posted by Mr Minio
My point was that making a distinction between critics and regular viewers was pointless.
For example, it was critics who ended Citizen Kane's 50-year reign at the top of the Sight & Sound poll of the greatest films of all time, and now Vertigo is the film that has been voted "best film of all time".
I would agree that a regular viewer probably wouldn't choose Citizen Kane *or* Vertigo as the greatest movie ever made... but still, those lists carry weight, because a lot of people pay attention to them and listen to what the critics said.
I SHOULD be more of a poser but I'm too sincere for that.
How does one tell if they are a normie? Is there a self assessment test that people can do?
Originally Posted by Mr Minio
My point was that making a distinction between critics and regular viewers was pointless.
Then again, if I imagine an actual normie, they're well below the critics in terms of taste, so who knows.
Then again, if I imagine an actual normie, they're well below the critics in terms of taste, so who knows.
My point was that making a distinction between critics and regular viewers was pointless.
Then again, if I imagine an actual normie, they're well below the critics in terms of taste, so who knows.
Then again, if I imagine an actual normie, they're well below the critics in terms of taste, so who knows.
Originally Posted by Mr Minio
Many critics are posers and normies anyway
If the studios had to rely on cinephiles for business, then the industry would just collapse.
Originally Posted by Mr Minio
Many critics are posers and normies anyway
Many critics are posers and normies anyway
Originally Posted by Mr Minio
Quality evaluation is subjective, too.
Critics - and regular people too - change their mind about filmed entertainment quite frequently, at least in my experience.
Quality evaluation is subjective, too. That's why I can say that I love Wiseau's The Room and it's the best American film of the 2000s and you can't do anything about it.
That's because evaluating film by something like acting or cinematography is not really all of how films work on you. These formal aspects are just a part of the whole. And the whole is more than just the sum of its parts. Sometimes, paradoxically, it's BETTER if a movie is terrible formally. And sometimes it isn't better. And I can't really tell when it's better and when it isn't better. You just know that. I think at the end of the day, it's all ambiguous and you can't really be seriously mad at people for having bad taste because that's at least partly what they were born with (you can develop your taste but only so much). So I'd say bashing people for their taste is as stupid as bashing them for their race or something like that, which is wrong. But that's what makes it fun.
That's because evaluating film by something like acting or cinematography is not really all of how films work on you. These formal aspects are just a part of the whole. And the whole is more than just the sum of its parts. Sometimes, paradoxically, it's BETTER if a movie is terrible formally. And sometimes it isn't better. And I can't really tell when it's better and when it isn't better. You just know that. I think at the end of the day, it's all ambiguous and you can't really be seriously mad at people for having bad taste because that's at least partly what they were born with (you can develop your taste but only so much). So I'd say bashing people for their taste is as stupid as bashing them for their race or something like that, which is wrong. But that's what makes it fun.
Yes, at the end of the day, you can just say it's my subjective opinion and somebody might think that, say, contemporary American cinema is superior to, say, Japanese cinema of the 50s. Well, of course, they can. as it all seems to be subjective. That's why arguing about taste is so fun. Arguing as in having quarrels, not arguing as in debating.
But.. if that's really their position you can bash them for this obviously ridiculous opinion that modern American cinema is greater than the greatest era of any national filmography ever and they can't really form a good reason for why because it's literally impossible. If anything, it's possible to do the opposite and say why 50s Japanese cinema is the best. But it should be obvious intuitively. That's what having good taste is, after all.
Anyway, these are just fun & flippant shoutbox
shouts tantamount to Twitter hot takes, not some weird introduction to philosophical debates on art that you always take them for.
But.. if that's really their position you can bash them for this obviously ridiculous opinion that modern American cinema is greater than the greatest era of any national filmography ever and they can't really form a good reason for why because it's literally impossible. If anything, it's possible to do the opposite and say why 50s Japanese cinema is the best. But it should be obvious intuitively. That's what having good taste is, after all.
Anyway, these are just fun & flippant shoutbox
shouts tantamount to Twitter hot takes, not some weird introduction to philosophical debates on art that you always take them for.