Enjoyment.

Seems better to say 'I don't like something but can appreciate the merits of it' and 'I like something but can appreciate its criticisms'.

Too obvious to be arguing about it really!
 
I like what I like.....the quality of the thing is immaterial.

For example I enjoy 1970s and 1980s horror films....most have extremely por production values and have budgets lower than the change in my pocket but I enjoy them nevertheless, equally I own a lot of high quality AV equipment to watch them on...and I enjoy that also.......

So both quality and enjoyment are subjective and relative to the individual....
 
I don't mind you gibbering.

Glaucus said:
Tummy on the other hand says me and others shouldn't be rating on enjoyment and that its wrong to do so.
Click to expand...

I'd rather you not put words in to my mouth. This isn't what I was saying, throughout the discussion last night you repeatedly tried to 'get one up' on my by saying that 'people don't do this' and they only rate on entertainment. You even contradicted yourself on this part.

Glaucus said:
and what other forms of entertainment do you apply this notion to? At a guess Zero.

It's a form of entertainment, entertainment is soley based on enjoyment. Good/bad is nothing other than group mentality and not wanting to look a fool.
Click to expand...

Glaucus said:
Where did I say it's the only way to rate or the only emotion I didn't.
I will say what I said to tummy, the ratings on imdb do not support your criteria for ratings the top films and the bottom films would be scored the same. The films with 6,7,8 would be scored drastically differently, if most people rated the way you do.
People like different things, films don't always need emotional responses. Sometimes people like to kick back, turn their brain off and watch some violent action movie.
Click to expand...

Stick to a coherent argument please.

This was what I was saying;


Tummy said:
I think there is a difference between enjoying a film and it being a good film or a bad film.

I think that reviews work a bit like this and a lot of the general public think like this if you talk films to them too.

Is that simple enough to understand?

I've pointed out previously too, that I extend this thinking in to other aspects of the visual media. (video games, theatre and television)

:)
Click to expand...

Despite you saying;

Glaucus said:
It's a form of entertainment, entertainment is soley based on enjoyment. Good/bad is nothing other than group mentality and not wanting to look a fool.
Click to expand...

I never claimed that people should rate films on enjoyment alone (something which you did) I claimed that they should rate films on the combination of the two, I even clarified this point by using critical reviews (by Educated people whom are educated within their given field for Dmpool, who likes to dismiss this if he doesn't agree with them) that a good reviewer will tell you what a film does well, what it doesn't do well and what they enjoyed about the film while explaining why.

You seem to either misunderstand me or selectively quote me to continue your debate because you've either misunderstood me or you're trying to be difficult and 'prove' you're correct.

I said at the time and I'll say again;


Tummy said:
Films shouldn't be solely judged on enjoyment, it's daft. People should be able to spot a good film, a decent film and a bad film. Enjoyment shouldn't effect the quality of the film, just how much you enjoy the film.


A good film is a good film (therein lies the debate) a bad film is a bad film, they can be enjoyable but that doesn't effect the film.

There are examples of bad films I enjoy and good films I haven't enjoyed, I can however tell that one's a good film and one's a bad film.
Click to expand...

The 'debate' about films are grades and scales of enjoyment as well as questioning the quality, quality is easier to 'judge' though.

As for you harping on about IMDB ratings, well obviously you'll get a wide demographic of people who score differently. People rate films differently, not just on entertainment like you said.

My opinion (if it's not clear enough) is that films can be enjoyed despite being terrible and despite being good. It's a balance. The debate lies (not between enjoyment) but between what people think the film did well and failed at.

This does work in other aspects of life. Games, Television and all sorts really, food too. (Something I pointed out last night too, but you ignored)
 
If you can not grasp or understand my point then I give up. There were several posters last night and in this thread that agreed with me too.

Literally (Richard) can't be bothered to discuss this with you DMpool.
 
Tummy said:
Films shouldn't be solely judged on enjoyment, it's daft.
Click to expand...

No it isn't.

I gave an example above of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.
On 9 criteria I gave it 90/90 but on enjoyment I voted it 0/10 which means in your world I've scored it 90% or 9/10 but in my world it got 0.
 
semi-pro waster said:
Why does it have to be an absolute choice? Can you not rate a film based on both enjoyment and quality? It doesn't make for a pure mark of either necessarily but provided you state your assumptions/reasons then that should allow the readers of the review to make up their own mind by adjusting the weighting to suit themselves.

Some films can be brilliantly directed/produced/acted/scored/whatever and they're worth watching as an example of that particular facet but they may not be enjoyable in the sense that you'd ever want to watch them again - some of the best films may not be ones that you enjoyed terribly in that they were uncomfortable to watch but they had an important message in them.

Enjoyment is more subjective than analysis of quality tends to be. In the same way that I find watching any of Ricky Gervais' comedy an exercise in warding off boredom and/or wincing at how cringeworthy it is I know that others find it to be the funniest thing they've ever seen - that's subjective. To tell you that it's got pretty high production values irrespective of my thoughts on it is fairly objective and that would be why having an element of analytical commentary is beneficial.

I also wouldn't be too quick to assume that even if we allow most people do review films analytically (I'm not convinced but for the sake of argument we'll go with it) that the number of people who don't review films analytically don't include in their number those who rate Transformers highly i.e. it may simply be a statistical anomaly due to those who rate on enjoyment also being the ones who rate that particular film or type of films.
Click to expand...

This is basically what I was saying last night actually. The last paragraph I was making the point most people can talk about enjoyment and the quality of a film separately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom