Maybe I'm drawing wrong conclusions from this, but I do disagree with (my subjective understanding of) this. I don't think there can be an idealized form to movies or even to different building blocks of them. Not even to a degree to form a consensus for the so-called objective discussion.
We can, however, break movies (and art in general) apart from the technical point of view. There may not be a way to objectively measure (all of) these technical aspects, but they provide means to discuss and argue our subjective opinions in this more serious way. In other words, the standard, to me, is the terminology and its definitions; not a consensus of an idealized form, but a consensus of how each individual form is built.
We can, however, break movies (and art in general) apart from the technical point of view. There may not be a way to objectively measure (all of) these technical aspects, but they provide means to discuss and argue our subjective opinions in this more serious way. In other words, the standard, to me, is the terminology and its definitions; not a consensus of an idealized form, but a consensus of how each individual form is built.
But yeah, if nothing else we definitely agree that it's about trying to find ways to discuss those differences. When two people come to a full understanding about why they differ, that, to me, is more encouraging than people who come to agree without that same understanding.