This Sub and “Objectively Bad” Movies

My least favorite thing about this sub, which I’ve lurked on for years, is the phrase “objectively bad.” It gets used a lot and it's bullshit.

For example, I liked Bright. I don’t think it was Casablanca, but I don’t think it was bad. What I came accross a lot in discussion here about it was that it was “objectively bad” if not still entertaining. First off, things aren’t so goddamn black and white. Everything isn’t either amazing or horrible.

Second, what are these standardized rules of what is “good” and “bad” when you are talking about an artistic/entertainment medium. Usually what I hear here is “cinematography was bland” or “script was bad” “plot was muddy” “direction was choppy” ... those are all subjective opinions.

All you can have when it comes to determining quality or goodness in a general consensus. And someone with a contrary opinion can still be valid, because that’s how the film affected them.

Film is a broad medium, so the intention of a film can vary wildly. It’s purpose can be to move you, entertain you, make a statement, etc. If a movie does that and finds an audience, it’s successful. Everything else is subjective.

For me, the worst thing a movie can be is boring. So when someone says Bright is “objectively bad” Im like... well I was entertained for 2 hours so get the fuck outta here with that. An even more extreme example is when people call the Room the “worst movie ever made” I always argue with that. I watch a lot of “bad” movies, I am a MSTie, I can tell you there are hundreds of movies far more excruciating to sit through. In my opinion, the Room is the most unintentionally surreal movie ever made. Again, subjective.

Submitted February 17, 2018 at 09:47PM by hockeyhockeyoioioi http://ift.tt/2sChmuj