If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Subjectivity in media discussions
Comments
Because, if viewed completely seriously (as it was intended to be viewed as), the entire movie is patently ridiculous.
Though even the people who enjoyed it at least acknowledged from every standard made for storytelling and visual media the films are shit.
"By that logic, the Room wouldn't be so dismissed. Then, what makes the Room being called a bad movie and not a good movie?"
But then you assume the only two quality adjectives are "good" and "bad". There's a difference between "amusingly inept" (Plan 9 From Outer Space) and "painfully inept" (Monster A Go Go), for one thing.
^Then I'm still perplexed as to what this "quality" thing is. Everyone talks about it as if everyone knows what it is, yet I haven't been able to follow the definition of it.
If you enjoy it, then it clearly is good in your eyes. The good simply outwieghs the bad in your opinion.
I don't believe in guilty pleasures. I don't feel ashamed to like anything.
Besides, you're 15, you're supposed to like stupid things.In any case, quality for recent things is harder to pin down. A lot of people have embraced The Dark Knight and Spider-man 2 because a lot of critics these days are grown up geeks and these films brought a level of technical and emotional sophistication people wanted. The fact that things need to be at least a year or two old to have any sort of influence affects things. In all things, it has to be identified on a case-by-case basis. Why is Army of Darknesss a glorious camp romp, but Batman & Robin a disaster of cinema, for example? Nothing is universally good or bad.
That said, you don't necessarily need to be good these days to be influential. Twilight and Smallville are now considered influential despite being universally acknowledged to be terrible.
And sometimes see the good things that the masses miss (*cough*eighties cartoons*cough*)
^Todd McFarlane?
I only watched the movies, and they were the most soporific things I've ever watched. Can't imagine what reading it must be like.
"More seriously, it's good- on the surface, as long as you don't read between the lines or pay close attention."
Better things than Twilight fall apart under that condition. Harry Potter, for instance.