|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Mar 10, 2021 15:00:45 GMT
Do you than generally think that people exaggerate how good a movie is or how bad a movie is ?
You know in your subjective opinion.
Personally in my subjective opinion, i think people often exaggerate on how bad a movie is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Power Ranger on Mar 10, 2021 15:17:54 GMT
Do you than generally think that people exeterrate how good a movie is or how bad a movie is ? You know in your subjective opinion. Personally in my subjective opinion, i think people often exeterrate on how bad a movie is. You mean ‘exaggerate’? Not really. Bad films can annoy you so you are passionate in your dislike. |
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Mar 10, 2021 15:21:23 GMT
Do you than generally think that people exeterrate how good a movie is or how bad a movie is ? You know in your subjective opinion. Personally in my subjective opinion, i think people often exeterrate on how bad a movie is. You mean ‘exaggerate’? Not really. Bad films can annoy you so you are passionate in your dislike. Obviously.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Mar 10, 2021 16:25:15 GMT
It does feel like there are quite a few films that are not as bad as people make them out to be. Same applies to the good ones in return of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by Catman 猫的主人 on Mar 10, 2021 16:26:33 GMT
On the other hand, there are no words that fully capture just how awful Garfield: The Movie is.
|
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Mar 10, 2021 16:31:10 GMT
Do you than generally think that people exaggerate how good a movie is or how bad a movie is ? You know in your subjective opinion. Personally in my subjective opinion, i think people often exaggerate on how bad a movie is.
They might. But I know when I'm telling someone 'You HAVE to see this movie', which doesn't happen often, I firmly believe it's that good.
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Mar 10, 2021 17:13:48 GMT
Do you than generally think that people exaggerate how good a movie is or how bad a movie is ? You know in your subjective opinion. Personally in my subjective opinion, i think people often exaggerate on how bad a movie is. I've heard both professional critics and average movie goers TEAR certain movies apart based on often inconsequential minutiae. Professional critics at least SOMETIMES talk about the actual quality of film making, but even that's rare. And hardly ever do I hear the average movie goer talk about anything more than that they liked or didn't like a movie based on "just because" type reasons. I've long ago decided that a movie has to be TRULY awful for me to actually hate it, because even a bad movie has some redeeming qualities. Even when a movie is bad I can still learn something from it. Like for example WHY it was bad. Also, I hardly ever hear a criticism that falls somewhere in the middle. Either it was great or it sucked. Y'know what? Most movies aren't either. Most movies are decent or good. And that's okay. It doesn't have to be the end all in either direction. However, I acknowledge that I am probably a bit MORE into movies than the average movie goer. I love movies, I love film making, and I follow careers and trends etc. etc. My eye might be a bit more technically and critically trained.
|
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Mar 10, 2021 17:14:59 GMT
Less than a tenth of people I met personally, and also less than a tenth I've met online, actually consider a movie good or bad until they find out if the movie depresses, scares, or does something negative to another person.
More than 90% of people who express an opinion on any movie will only approve a movie that weakens, scares, humiliates, dTiscredits, depresses, falsely accuses, and/or dehumanizes another human being. That's how many people are totally possessed by demons. I'm sure it isn't their fault that they're possessed. It just makes them "sheep" who are out of control.
A look at the IMBD top 250 proves this. And the list of 250 was even more depressing and dehumanizing 20 years ago, so we're actually getting a little better. Not much, but a little better, at making up our own minds.
Most people simply base their approval on how much black magic or voodoo it causes other humans. It gives them a false feeling of power, when in fact they're totally out of control.
A movie that does these things has no value at all, and it's even worse when a lot of resources go into the movie. It isn't as bad for a low budget movie with men in fake monster suits to be a bad movie as it is for a total waste of special effects, great musical talent, genius graphics, big name stars, million dollar sets, on "hate mongering" movies. And the movie critics since 1965 have been praising these very movies most, with no rational explanation of why they praise these movies. To say "great score" or "great scenery" or "great acting" for something that wastes these things on hate messages, is as poor as it gets for giving a movie a good grade. It defies all logic.
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Mar 10, 2021 17:15:03 GMT
On the other hand, there are no words that fully capture just how awful Garfield: The Movie is. A) Well... duh. B) Catman dissing a cat movie? Que?
|
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Mar 10, 2021 19:00:34 GMT
Do you than generally think that people exaggerate how good a movie is or how bad a movie is ? You know in your subjective opinion. Personally in my subjective opinion, i think people often exaggerate on how bad a movie is. Also, I hardly ever hear a criticism that falls somewhere in the middle. Either it was great or it sucked. Y'know what? Most movies aren't either. Most movies are decent or good. And that's okay. It doesn't have to be the end all in either direction. I agree the majority of movies are decent or good. Yes its rare to hear or see criticism that falls somewhere in the middle.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Mar 10, 2021 19:44:29 GMT
Do you than generally think that people exaggerate how good a movie is or how bad a movie is ?You know in your subjective opinion. Some people do and some people don't, and what do you mean exactly? Do you mean ratings or when they talk about the movie or both? Also a strange question. If someone says they hate or love a movie I am inclined to believe them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Mar 10, 2021 19:48:50 GMT
Do you than generally think that people exaggerate how good a movie is or how bad a movie is ?You know in your subjective opinion. Some people do and some people don't, and what do you mean exactly? Do you mean ratings or when they talk about the movie or both? Also a strange question. If someone says they hate or love a movie I am inclined to believe them. Everybody else seem to understand the question. Not sure why you don`t because its a simple question. There really should be no need for me to explain it. The question is if you agree or disagree with them, not if you belive them.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Mar 10, 2021 19:50:23 GMT
Also, I hardly ever hear a criticism that falls somewhere in the middle. Either it was great or it sucked. Y'know what? Most movies aren't either. Most movies are decent or good. And that's okay. It doesn't have to be the end all in either direction. I agree the majority of movies are decent or good. Yes its rare to hear or see criticism that falls somewhere in the middle. What kind of people are you guys talking to? Most people right here on IMDB 2 don't do that. I have never met someone who does that.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Mar 10, 2021 19:53:04 GMT
Some people do and some people don't, and what do you mean exactly? Do you mean ratings or when they talk about the movie or both? Also a strange question. If someone says they hate or love a movie I am inclined to believe them. Everybody else seem to understand the question. Not sure why you don`t because its a simple question. There really should be no need for me to explain it. The question is if you agree or disagree with them, not if you belive them. The question is "do I think people exaggerate their subjective opinion", so it is about whether I believe them or not. I understand what you are asking, but there are different ways of exaggerating. Some people will exaggerate and some people won't. I hate 300 for example, but that is a completely subjective response and separate from whether the movie is objectively awful. It has qualities to it, but it is one of the most cringe-inducingly directed movies I have ever seen, where every character is a card-board cut out set to a video game background. It is also very boring and emotionally dead movie. Of course it has some redeeming qualities, which is why I rate it 3.5/10 and not 1/10.
|
|
|
|
Post by DarkManX on Mar 10, 2021 20:01:09 GMT
Yeah I think they do. There's no objectivity anymore. A movie is either the greatest film ever or the worst film ever with no in between.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Mar 11, 2021 7:18:03 GMT
I typically only discuss movies online and people do tend to overhype good movies sometimes. There are a lot of enjoyable movies that get made out to be modern day masterpieces when really they're just a lot of fun.
Horror movies are massively underrated on IMDb though. Their rating system would have you believe that there are only a handful of horror flicks worth seeing. Very few get more than a 7.0 - if they even get that. The voter ratings reveal a heavy bias against horror.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Mar 11, 2021 7:32:49 GMT
I typically only discuss movies online and people do tend to overhype good movies sometimes. There are a lot of enjoyable movies that get made out to be modern day masterpieces when really they're just a lot of fun. Horror movies are massively underrated on IMDb though. Their rating system would have you believe that there are only a handful of horror flicks worth seeing. Very few get more than a 7.0 - if they even get that. The voter ratings reveal a heavy bias against horror. There is a bias against horror and I;d say that is because the majority of horror movies aren't very good, or rather that they don't do much for me. Do you want people to lie about their subjective response to movies just to make you feel good? The only people that are obligated to be objective when it comes to art are "professional" critics, because it is their job to inform people on what to watch. That isn't the general movie watchers obligation and IMDB is for general movie viewers. I want to see people's subjective ratings in their complete subjectivity when it comes to movies. I am a subjectivist when it comes to art. Speaking of subjectivity, I have talked to fans of slasher movies that admit that they aren't good movies, but that they just enjoy them for what they are. When it comes to most slasher movies, I honestly think most of them are "objectively" mediocre movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Mar 11, 2021 8:53:13 GMT
I typically only discuss movies online and people do tend to overhype good movies sometimes. There are a lot of enjoyable movies that get made out to be modern day masterpieces when really they're just a lot of fun. Horror movies are massively underrated on IMDb though. Their rating system would have you believe that there are only a handful of horror flicks worth seeing. Very few get more than a 7.0 - if they even get that. The voter ratings reveal a heavy bias against horror. There is a bias against horror and I;d say that is because the majority of horror movies aren't very good, or rather that they don't do much for me. Do you want people to lie about their subjective response to movies just to make you feel good? The only people that are obligated to be objective when it comes to art are "professional" critics, because it is their job to inform people on what to watch. That isn't the general movie watchers obligation and IMDB is for general movie viewers. I want to see people's subjective ratings in their complete subjectivity when it comes to movies. I am a subjectivist when it comes to art. Speaking of subjectivity, I have talked to fans of slasher movies that admit that they aren't good movies, but that they just enjoy them for what they are. When it comes to most slasher movies, I honestly think most of them are "objectively" mediocre movies. I must admit that I find it hard to be objective given my love of the horror genre and there's no doubt that there are plenty of enjoyable horror flicks that are quite silly/cheesy or seriously lacking in certain departments (be that characterisation, dialogue, pacing, etc.) I do think there are more high quality - or at the very least reasonably well made - horror films that end up with lower ratings than they perhaps deserve due to the fact that (a) many people dislike the genre and are somewhat hostile towards it, and (b) many watch horror movies solely for the fright factor and downvote horror films that don't scare them without taking said film's actual merits into account. All that said, I don't really pay much attention to IMDb ratings when it comes to horror, as I find they rarely match my own assessments of the movies in question. That's less true with regard to other genres, but such is life. I typically use horror movie forums and Google to research horror films I might be interested in viewing. I guess that when all is said and done I'm also very much a subjectivist when it comes to the media I consume.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Mar 11, 2021 10:56:56 GMT
There is a bias against horror and I;d say that is because the majority of horror movies aren't very good, or rather that they don't do much for me. Do you want people to lie about their subjective response to movies just to make you feel good? The only people that are obligated to be objective when it comes to art are "professional" critics, because it is their job to inform people on what to watch. That isn't the general movie watchers obligation and IMDB is for general movie viewers. I want to see people's subjective ratings in their complete subjectivity when it comes to movies. I am a subjectivist when it comes to art. Speaking of subjectivity, I have talked to fans of slasher movies that admit that they aren't good movies, but that they just enjoy them for what they are. When it comes to most slasher movies, I honestly think most of them are "objectively" mediocre movies. I must admit that I find it hard to be objective given my love of the horror genre and there's no doubt that there are plenty of enjoyable horror flicks that are quite silly/cheesy or seriously lacking in certain departments (be that characterisation, dialogue, pacing, etc.) I do think there are more high quality - or at the very least reasonably well made - horror films that end up with lower ratings than they perhaps deserve due to the fact that (a) many people dislike the genre and are somewhat hostile towards it, and (b) many watch horror movies solely for the fright factor and downvote horror films that don't scare them without taking said film's actual merits into account. All that said, I don't really pay much attention to IMDb ratings when it comes to horror, as I find they rarely match my own assessments of the movies in question. That's less true with regard to other genres, but such is life. I typically use horror movie forums and Google to research horror films I might be interested in viewing. I guess that when all is said and done I'm also very much a subjectivist when it comes to the media I consume. I agree that horror movies don't need to be scary (they do need to be creepy at least), but just as an example I don't care for The Babadook, but I do take it's merits into account. That is why I rate it 6/10. That is a moderate rating. For me the movie failed at being emotional for me, though that is what it is trying to do. I need to have an emotional investment in what is happening and this movie left me cold and disinterested. The purpose of the movie is exploring the way we deal with death, but it only sort of succeeds. The horror genre is also one of the most repetitive genres imo and I think that it has a specific loyal fanbase, but that most people just find much of the genre boring or stupid. It isn't even the fact that many aren't scary, it is the fact that so many are just repeats and often have bad acting etc. I agree that there are good horror movies that I would rate higher than IMDB. Mandy, The VVitch or Under the Skin for example. Another issue with horror movies is the moral problems people have with some of them. A movie can be technically well made and well acted and still end up terrible due to being morally offensive or extremely off-putting. The Strangers is a good movie that is made terrible by the ending for me. It goes from a 6.5/10 down to a 4/10. The ending makes the entire rest of the movie feel like an exercise in sadism. Then there is the Saw series. The first one is fun, but the sequels are just a sort of clever excuse to show people being tortured. It is torture porn with a thoughtout overarching narrative like a puzzle, but besides the puzzle aspect nothing else is very good about them. These also start becoming very repetitive and transparent. I don't think these movies are very well made either and have very annoying editing and characters I couldn't care less about.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason143 on Mar 11, 2021 11:18:05 GMT
No they're usually spot on. This is why I consider ImDB ratings the gold standard. They are the best reflection of general audience sentiment. Not rotten tomatoes aggregates full of snobby politicised critics, not cinemascore that is barely used and no other websites. I can go to any imdb movie and 9 times out of 10 i would see the audience rating and think yeh that seems about right. The vast majority of Hollywood movies are in the 6-7/10 range which makes sense as people in this thread have said most movies are average to decent.
|
|
