|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 19:10:52 GMT
I'm not missing that at all, and I couldn't agree more. What you're not understanding re my comment is that a movie triggering memories for you is not a formal property of the movie. So if what you're enjoying is the memories, it's not the movie that you're enjoying. (The movie is its formal properties.) The point is that it's incoherent to say that what you're enjoying is identical to what you feel is awful. It doesn't matter if it's a formal property of the movie because the person is NOT A CRITIC. They like the movie because of the memories it evokes but I am sure that is not the only reason they enjoy it. Then again filmmakers add things because they know it will evoke memories in people and that is often a quality of great filmmaking because the director does it purposely. Just like someone who watches a movie about someone dying of cancer, the movie will have a far more profound effect on them if they know someone who died of cancer or has cancer etc.
It isn't incoherent to say I am enjoying something I think is awful. People have conflicting emotions and thoughts all the time. It's like going to a car race in hopes of seeing an accident. It's a bad thing but you find watching it entertaining. Should you feel guilty about that? Yes, probably.
What you'd enjoy about the accident isn't the same thing you'd find bad about the accident. That's what you're not getting (although admittedly I'm not explaining it well enough, but in my experience this sort of thing is much easier to explain in real time, preferably in person, or at least in an active chat, because it works better if we can go back and forth with questions/answers rapid fire in a short span of time). It is incoherent to say that you're enjoying the very same thing that you think is awful if you have any handle on how to use English so that it bears any resemblance to how other people are using English. This is simply because "awful," "bad," etc. conventionally denotes things that you don't enjoy, things that you'd rather avoid, that you'd rather not have happen or rather not experience, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 1, 2017 19:18:32 GMT
It doesn't matter if it's a formal property of the movie because the person is NOT A CRITIC. They like the movie because of the memories it evokes but I am sure that is not the only reason they enjoy it. Then again filmmakers add things because they know it will evoke memories in people and that is often a quality of great filmmaking because the director does it purposely. Just like someone who watches a movie about someone dying of cancer, the movie will have a far more profound effect on them if they know someone who died of cancer or has cancer etc.
It isn't incoherent to say I am enjoying something I think is awful. People have conflicting emotions and thoughts all the time. It's like going to a car race in hopes of seeing an accident. It's a bad thing but you find watching it entertaining. Should you feel guilty about that? Yes, probably.
What you'd enjoy about the accident isn't the same thing you'd find bad about the accident. That's what you're not getting (although admittedly I'm not explaining it well enough, but in my experience this sort of thing is much easier to explain in real time, preferably in person, or at least in an active chat, because it works better if we can go back and forth with questions/answers rapid fire in a short span of time). It is incoherent to say that you're enjoying the very same thing that you think is awful if you have any handle on how to use English so that it bears any resemblance to how other people are using English. That isn't true either. If there wasn't someone in the race car no one would care, meaning it is the possibility of injury that is a big part of the intrigue. What about watching Hockey in hopes that a fight breaks out? or watching an accident in hopes of seeing blood and guts?
And yes, I do think movies that are so bad they are entertaining shouldn't exist.
We will never understand each other so I am going to just drop the subject now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 19:20:47 GMT
What you'd enjoy about the accident isn't the same thing you'd find bad about the accident. That's what you're not getting (although admittedly I'm not explaining it well enough, but in my experience this sort of thing is much easier to explain in real time, preferably in person, or at least in an active chat, because it works better if we can go back and forth with questions/answers rapid fire in a short span of time). It is incoherent to say that you're enjoying the very same thing that you think is awful if you have any handle on how to use English so that it bears any resemblance to how other people are using English. That isn't true either. If there wasn't someone in the race car no one would care, meaning it is the possibility of injury that is a big part of the intrigue. What about watching Hockey in hopes that a fight breaks out? or watching an accident in hopes of seeing blood and guts?
And yes, I do think movies that are so bad they are entertaining shouldn't exist.
We will never understand each other so I am going to just drop the subject now.
I didn't say anything at all about what you'd actually enjoy or what you'd actually find bad. I have no idea--I'm not you. So you're saying that you enjoy the possibility of injury, but you find the possibility of injury bad. Is that correct? |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 1, 2017 19:23:18 GMT
That isn't true either. If there wasn't someone in the race car no one would care, meaning it is the possibility of injury that is a big part of the intrigue. What about watching Hockey in hopes that a fight breaks out? or watching an accident in hopes of seeing blood and guts?
And yes, I do think movies that are so bad they are entertaining shouldn't exist.
We will never understand each other so I am going to just drop the subject now.
I didn't say anything at all about what you'd actually enjoy or what you'd actually find bad. I have no idea--I'm not you. So you're saying that you enjoy the possibility of injury, but you find the possibility of injury bad. Is that correct?
YES!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 19:24:51 GMT
I didn't say anything at all about what you'd actually enjoy or what you'd actually find bad. I have no idea--I'm not you. So you're saying that you enjoy the possibility of injury, but you find the possibility of injury bad. Is that correct?
YES!!! Sure, and would it be possible to say what you enjoy about the possibility of injury and what you find bad about it, or would you say that they're unanalyzable beyond that (beyond just being the brute fact that you enjoy it and find it bad in other words)? |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 1, 2017 19:31:10 GMT
Sure, and would it be possible to say what you enjoy about the possibility of injury and what you find bad about it, or would you say that they're unanalyzable beyond that? Of course.
People are intrigued by seeing bad things happen even though they know those things are bad. They are bad because they could result in death of another person hence people will usually feel guilt over finding those things entertaining.
I am not a psychologist or an English teacher so that is the best way I can describe it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2017 19:38:56 GMT
That still has nothing to do with me finding something bad and entertaining at the same time. I consider movies like that a happy accident, most bad movies are not entertaining. But I don't need people to make such films, I can just as easily be entertained by a movie that's good or average. The relevance is that you're thus using "bad" to refer to qualities that you'd prefer to experience rather than not experience. So it begins to be a mystery what qualities "bad" could possibly map to in your usage, and what relation the term has to the normal usage of "bad." No, I do not "prefer" bad acting, it's just that sometimes bad acting can be entertaining. And entertaining does not equal "good", so it's very much possible that something is bad and entertaining at the same time. It's kind of like Schadenfreude. Falling down the stairs is definitely not a nice thing, but it can look pretty funny to bystanders. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 1, 2017 19:46:27 GMT
The relevance is that you're thus using "bad" to refer to qualities that you'd prefer to experience rather than not experience. So it begins to be a mystery what qualities "bad" could possibly map to in your usage, and what relation the term has to the normal usage of "bad." No, I do not "prefer" bad acting, it's just that sometimes bad acting can be entertaining. And entertaining does not equal "good", so it's very much possible that something is bad and entertaining at the same time. It's kind of like Schadenfreude. Falling down the stairs is definitely not a nice thing, but it can look pretty funny to bystanders. ^^^This
Something being entertaining or funny isn't always a good thing. With a "so bad it's good" movie you are basically finding entertainment in the incompetency of others.
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 20:03:52 GMT
Sure, and would it be possible to say what you enjoy about the possibility of injury and what you find bad about it, or would you say that they're unanalyzable beyond that? Of course.
People are intrigued by seeing bad things happen even though they know those things are bad. They are bad because they could result in death of another person hence people will usually feel guilt over finding those things entertaining.
I am not a psychologist or an English teacher so that is the best way I can describe it.
Wait--I thought you were picking an example that applied to you. If it's just hypothetical for you it's going to be difficult to explain this to you in a way that works. You're not saying that you find both entertainment in the possibility of someone getting hurt while you also find it bad that someone might get hurt? |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 20:05:27 GMT
The relevance is that you're thus using "bad" to refer to qualities that you'd prefer to experience rather than not experience. So it begins to be a mystery what qualities "bad" could possibly map to in your usage, and what relation the term has to the normal usage of "bad." No, I do not "prefer" bad acting, it's just that sometimes bad acting can be entertaining. And entertaining does not equal "good", so it's very much possible that something is bad and entertaining at the same time. It's kind of like Schadenfreude. Falling down the stairs is definitely not a nice thing, but it can look pretty funny to bystanders. It's not that you prefer bad acting to good acting. What I said is that you're using "bad" to refer to qualities that you'd prefer to experience rather than not experience. In other words, you're calling x "bad acting" in this situation, and you'd prefer to experience x than to not experience x. In other (other) words, in this case, you'd prefer to experience bad acting than to not experience bad acting. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 20:18:53 GMT
Actually I thought of a way to explain this that should be much easier to understand:
Let's say that you call film x "so bad it's good." That is, you believe that film x is bad, but you enjoy film x.
Well, presumably, you wouldn't say that "film x is bad" and "I enjoy film x" are synonymous phrases. That is, they do not mean just the same thing to you.
So the question is--what is the difference? What does "film x is bad" refer to that's not the same as "I enjoy film x"?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2017 20:25:22 GMT
It's not that you prefer bad acting to good acting. What I said is that you're using "bad" to refer to qualities that you'd prefer to experience rather than not experience. In other words, you're calling x "bad acting" in this situation, and you'd prefer to experience x than to not experience x. In other (other) words, in this case, you'd prefer to experience bad acting than to not experience bad acting. I have no idea if I'd prefer that, because I don't know what the movie would've been like without the bad acting. If every bad thing in the movie would've been good, maybe I still would've enjoyed it. Who knows? All I can say is that, in this case, I enjoyed the bad acting. But why would that mean it's not coherent to find something bad and entertaining at the same time? Again, one does not rule out the other. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 20:29:06 GMT
It's not that you prefer bad acting to good acting. What I said is that you're using "bad" to refer to qualities that you'd prefer to experience rather than not experience. In other words, you're calling x "bad acting" in this situation, and you'd prefer to experience x than to not experience x. In other (other) words, in this case, you'd prefer to experience bad acting than to not experience bad acting. I have no idea if I'd prefer that, because I don't know what the movie would've been like without the bad acting. If every bad thing in the movie would've been good, maybe I still would've enjoyed it. Who knows? All I can say is that, in this case, I enjoyed the bad acting. But why would that mean it's not coherent to find something bad and entertaining at the same time? Again, one does not rule out the other. Again the option is not what you're calling bad acting versus good acting. The option is experiencing what you're calling bad acting and NOT experiencing what you're calling bad acting (so in other words, experiencing nothing). |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 1, 2017 20:38:53 GMT
Of course.
People are intrigued by seeing bad things happen even though they know those things are bad. They are bad because they could result in death of another person hence people will usually feel guilt over finding those things entertaining.
I am not a psychologist or an English teacher so that is the best way I can describe it.
Wait--I thought you were picking an example that applied to you. If it's just hypothetical for you it's going to be difficult to explain this to you in a way that works. You're not saying that you find both entertainment in the possibility of someone getting hurt while you also find it bad that someone might get hurt?I am saying that. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 20:41:58 GMT
Wait--I thought you were picking an example that applied to you. If it's just hypothetical for you it's going to be difficult to explain this to you in a way that works. You're not saying that you find both entertainment in the possibility of someone getting hurt while you also find it bad that someone might get hurt?I am saying that. Cool. So are "The possibility that someone might get hurt is bad" and "I enjoy the possibility that someone might get hurt" synonymous phrases in your opinion? If not, what makes the difference? |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 1, 2017 20:45:46 GMT
Actually I thought of a way to explain this that should be much easier to understand: Let's say that you call film x "so bad it's good." That is, you believe that film x is bad, but you enjoy film x. Well, presumably, you wouldn't say that "film x is bad" and "I enjoy film x" are synonymous phrases. That is, they do not mean just the same thing to you. So the question is--what is the difference? What does "film x is bad" refer to that's not the same as "I enjoy film x"? First of all I want to make sure we are not confusing "guilty pleasure" with "so bad it's good." While they can be the same in some cases. I think I figured out a way to explain it so you can understand. It's like laughing at someone embrassing themselves or failing so bad that you can't help but laugh. It is entertaining to witness these things happen but I prefer they didn't happen in the first place and that I feel sad for the person that I am laughing at. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 20:49:11 GMT
Actually I thought of a way to explain this that should be much easier to understand: Let's say that you call film x "so bad it's good." That is, you believe that film x is bad, but you enjoy film x. Well, presumably, you wouldn't say that "film x is bad" and "I enjoy film x" are synonymous phrases. That is, they do not mean just the same thing to you. So the question is--what is the difference? What does "film x is bad" refer to that's not the same as "I enjoy film x"? First of all I want to make sure we are not confusing "guilty pleasure" with "so bad it's good." While they can be the same in some cases. I think I figured out a way to explain it so you can understand. It's like laughing at someone embrassing themselves or failing so bad that you can't help but laugh. It is entertaining to witness these things happen but I prefer they didn't happen in the first place and that I feel sad for the person that I am laughing at. Are "I find it funny that Joe fell down the stairs" and "I feel bad that Joe fell down the stairs" synonymous phrases? If they don't mean the same thing, what makes a difference in their meaning? |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 1, 2017 20:53:34 GMT
Cool. So are "The possibility that someone might get hurt is bad" and "I enjoy the possibility that someone might get hurt" synonymous phrases in your opinion? If not, what makes the difference? It depends on the situation just like it depends on the movie. Part of the reason some people enjoy seeing other people fail is because it makes them feel better about themselves. But they usually know that is a bad thing to enjoy resulting in two completely different emotions at the same time. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 1, 2017 20:55:35 GMT
Cool. So are "The possibility that someone might get hurt is bad" and "I enjoy the possibility that someone might get hurt" synonymous phrases in your opinion? If not, what makes the difference? It depends on the situation just like it depends on the movie. Part of the reason some people enjoy seeing other people fail is because it makes them feel better about themselves. But they usually know that is a bad thing to enjoy resulting in two completely different emotions at the same time. I'm not saying there's a right answer. So sometimes those two phrases are synonymous to you and sometimes they're not. Is that right? |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 1, 2017 20:56:52 GMT
First of all I want to make sure we are not confusing "guilty pleasure" with "so bad it's good." While they can be the same in some cases. I think I figured out a way to explain it so you can understand. It's like laughing at someone embrassing themselves or failing so bad that you can't help but laugh. It is entertaining to witness these things happen but I prefer they didn't happen in the first place and that I feel sad for the person that I am laughing at. Are "I find it funny that Joe fell down the stairs" and "I feel bad that Joe fell down the stairs" synonymous phrases? If they don't mean the same thing, what makes a difference in their meaning? Yes. In that case they would the same depending on how he fell down the stairs but I meant more like watching someone fail at a lecture or something like that. I am talking about failing VERY badly. |
|
