Zack Snyder's Justice League

[GaryPool]

That's exactly it, resonation. Whatever the 'thing' in question is resonates with everyone differently. People who admire critics and their opinions typically do so most likely because of their shared opinions in every regard. I don't think many reviews are worth reading as I don't think many reviews are objective, which they shouldn't be because they're a personal thing.

However, I know people who would call a film like Joker bad, or Grave of the Fireflies, because they don't like how those films make them feel - and it's seen with any typical 'dark' film, tending to always be an uphill battle to win people over because a lot of people don't like to be made to feel anything other than brain-numbed, joyful or similar. But to look at those films objectively, I don't think you can call them bad films.

Throw in that people have their political leanings, their biases to certain things, their predisposed ideas of how something should be rather than what is etc. and there's too many reasons going on a single review for me to discount them just as what they are, opinions puffed up. I enjoy reading opinions, but reviews are glorified, and more often than not, especially in regards to reviewers naming a film as pretentious, they're more likely being pretentious themselves. I look at reviews more as a gauge of popularity, if I want someone's opinion I'll ask someone personally or on a doll website thank you very much.

Also in todays age critic reviews in their capacity of what they were made for, to guide viewers in what is worth their time or not, is the main part that's obsolete. We live in a societ... digital age where you can stream most and every film at minimal cost, and where because there's so much at our fingertips straight off the bat people are more willing to give anything that tickles their fancy at a whim a shot. I don't think the majority of people read reviews anymore to guide them, as opposed just to add fuel to their fire of praising a films worth or lack thereof on general consensus, it's a boasting tool now, nothing more.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Obviously people do seek out like minds. That's why there are cliques and groups and clubs and cults and religions.

 

[GaryPool]

And orgies.

 

[Wor-Gar]

I forgot the best one.


Now if only this movie had been: Zach Snyder's Justice Orgy....!

 

[GaryPool]

Isn't that what's happening because of the film?

 

[Wor-Gar]

Wait, where are these orgies?

It puts the Wonder back into Wonder Woman.

It also explains why Flash is sad.

 

[GaryPool]

I think Ducky has organised one at their place - the negative comments are just to deter people who weren't invited or aware of the party turning up out of the blue, it's the perfect plan!

 

[snoop101]

Wait, where are these orgies?

It puts the Wonder back into Wonder Woman.

It also explains why Flash is sad.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Obviously people do seek out like minds. That's why there are cliques and groups and clubs and cults and religions.

Why is that? Is it a form of control, a way to maintain our definition or understanding of the status quo? So like anything that challenges it or off balances it must be "wrong"...so here's MY opinion ("which is really the truth") ...and that's how you get endless threads of people going back and forth. People trying to maintain their little worlds intact.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Why is that? Is it a form of control, a way to maintain our definition or understanding of the status quo? So like anything that challenges it or off balances it must be "wrong"...so here's MY opinion ("which is really the truth") ...and that's how you get endless threads of people going back and forth. People trying to maintain their little worlds intact.

That's communication.

Humans are herders.

 

[jye4ever]

Why is that? Is it a form of control, a way to maintain our definition or understanding of the status quo? So like anything that challenges it or off balances it must be "wrong"...so here's MY opinion ("which is really the truth") ...and that's how you get endless threads of people going back and forth. People trying to maintain their little worlds intact.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Obviously people do seek out like minds. That's why there are cliques and groups and clubs and cults and religions.

Why is that? Is it a form of control, a way to maintain our definition or understanding of the status quo? So like anything that challenges it or off balances it must be "wrong"...so here's MY opinion ("which is really the truth") ...and that's how you get endless threads of people going back and forth. People trying to maintain their little worlds intact.

I think it depends on the subject. Some discussions (philosophy, politics, etc.) benefit from differing opinions and informed perspectives from all sides. Echo chambers in those cases are counterproductive. People should want/seek to engage with differing views on those subjects because there's more at stake in terms of better informing our overall worldview and influencing future behavior accordingly. But movies and television? Nah.

Talking about movies with like-minded people just seems practical because it's better suited for enhancing the experience of what movies are for: enjoyment and/or provoking thought.

We all do it, but what's the point really in debating subjective forms of art entertainment like movies, tv, and music? Is someone suddenly going to realize, "hey, wait a minute... I guess I didn't enjoy that one after all" and start thinking their genuine sense of enjoyment or reflection was "wrong" somehow? That'd be absurd.

 

[Wor-Gar]

It is good to be educated about film whether you like the film or not. Some movies do improve with understanding. Like Citizen Kane.

Double entendres don't work until you have a greater understanding. For instance, the old Bond movies, Bugs Bunny and The Simpsons all work on multiple levels that entertain children and then have a little something extra for the adults.

 

[ajp4mgs]

It is good to be educated about film whether you like the film or not. Some movies do improve with understanding. Like Citizen Kane.

Double entendres don't work until you have a greater understanding. For instance, the old Bond movies, Bugs Bunny and The Simpsons all work on multiple levels that entertain children and then have a little something extra for the adults.

Certainly. But being educated about film doesn't necessarily preclude someone from enjoying a "bad" movie. Nor does it make anyone an authority on what is "good" for anyone else simply because of an enhanced understanding of technical merits in storytelling execution.

There are plenty of films I've enjoyed far more as I've gotten older because certain nuanced elements were lost on me in my younger days. But there are also some I've watched where I easily recognized technical mastery, yet could never care for the experience. If it bores me to pain, then I don't care how objectively proficient the execution was on any level.

Most importantly, even in the case where a film can be enhanced by being more educated or informed, it's the person making the case for its merits who will have any chance of changing someone's mind. I don't see how or why a person would benefit from a discourse where a movie that was enjoyable to them gets crapped on. The experience of enjoyment doesn't change, no matter how "expert" the opposing person is on the art of film.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Of course, that is all true.

But there are also some I've watched where I easily recognized technical mastery, yet could never care for the experience. If it bores me to pain, then I don't care how objectively proficient the execution was on any level.

I have that problem with 2001. I just can't get into it and I've tried time and time again. I understand its merits... but I find it hard to watch. Lawrence of Arabia too. Yet I find Bridge on the River Kwai immensely watchable because I saw that as a very young and impressionable child.

 

[jye4ever]

I get great enjoyment from hearing another persons opinion but I find that I am way more likely to be convinced to like a movie more that I originally disliked than I am to dislike a movie I originally loved.

If I love a movie no one will change my mind but if I dislike a movie I can still be convinced to like it.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Its like that with girls too.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Of course, that is all true.



I have that problem with 2001. I just can't get into it and I've tried time and time again. I understand its merits... but I find it hard to watch. Lawrence of Arabia too. Yet I find Bridge on the River Kwai immensely watchable because I saw that as a very young and impressionable child.

I'm right there with you on 2 out of those 3.

I can't really enjoy 2001, even though I recognize how groundbreaking it was, how masterful the execution was, and how admirably ambitious the whole endeavor was. I just don't care about 20-minute shots to translate the notion of isolation, or of grandness, or of any other important unspoken element of the greater human condition being remarked on in the visuals.

So 2001 is a perfect example for me too of an undeniably great film that isn't "good" to *me* - because it fails to keep me engaged and/or entertained. Love what it says, but never look forward to the next time I take in that message for those nearly 3 hours.

Like you, I also LOVE Bridge on the River Kwai. That one is a case where message and delivery were both well-executed *and* accessible in terms of continued engagement and entertainment from start to finish. Ironically, like 2001, saying a great deal without words - but doing so in a more riveting way for my film-watching preferences.

Where I differ from your experiences with these is Lawrence of Arabia. This is one of those I didn't enjoy at all as a teen and young adult, but grew to love. What used to bore me about the extended and methodical shots now blow me away with how they set the topography as a critical "character" in the drama relative to the real characters/people.

That slow ride-in first appearance of Sherif Ali has become one of my favorite examples of masterful shots and visual storytelling. I now think of the film as the true epic it was promised to be when I first watched it and was just bored. Again unlike with 2001, the characterizations were rich enough to help me stay invested until I was able to appreciate the other elements.

I get great enjoyment from hearing another persons opinion but I find that I am way more likely to be convinced to like a movie more that I originally disliked than I am to dislike a movie I originally loved.

If I love a movie no one will change my mind but if I dislike a movie I can still be convinced to like it.

Yep, same here.

 

[Wor-Gar]

 

[matticus]

The Transformers movies make me think of why I am watching the Transformer movies.