Justice League

[Landlord]

It means criticizing it relentlessly for bad dialogue, plot holes, or using deus ex machina...

It means people should just go to a superhero film and enjoy it for what it is--2-3 hours of escapist entertainment.

Are people not allowed to do that for movies that are awful?

Are people always able to enjoy movies even when they're awful?

Of course they're allowed to criticize movies that are awful. The things is, "awful" is subjective. Most people thought Suicide Squad was awful. I loved it. Does that make my opinion any less valid because I am in the minority?

Of course people probably won't enjoy movies if they think they're awful. It comes down to genre and subject matter. I give far more leeway and leniency to a comic book movie than I do to a movie about a historic event.

Awful isn't universally subjective. There are elements of art and creativity that are subjective, sure, but there is also such thing as good art and bad art. If you loved suicide squad, good on you, but it makes me question how much you understand about filmmaking, and thus leads me to wonder if you have any ability of discerning what is or isn't quality.

To the bolded, it doesn't just come down to those things - it also comes down to quality.

 

[Making Chimichangas]

It means criticizing it relentlessly for bad dialogue, plot holes, or using deus ex machina...

It means people should just go to a superhero film and enjoy it for what it is--2-3 hours of escapist entertainment.

Are people not allowed to do that for movies that are awful?

Are people always able to enjoy movies even when they're awful?

Of course they're allowed to criticize movies that are awful. The things is, "awful" is subjective. Most people thought Suicide Squad was awful. I loved it. Does that make my opinion any less valid because I am in the minority?

Of course people probably won't enjoy movies if they think they're awful. It comes down to genre and subject matter. I give far more leeway and leniency to a comic book movie than I do to a movie about a historic event.

Awful isn't universally subjective. There are elements of art and creativity that are subjective, sure, but there is also such thing as good art and bad art. If you loved suicide squad, good on you, but it makes me question how much you understand about filmmaking, and thus leads me to wonder if you have any ability of discerning what is or isn't quality.

To the bolded, it doesn't just come down to those things - it also comes down to quality.

I have no ability to discern quality, that's why I post on internet message boards.

:blink:

 

[Mavric]

 

[Enhance]

LOMS said: You can understand the source material and still come to an informed decision of these movies being a result of poor filmmaking.

​Totally understand that.

But people are taking these comic book super hero movies so seriously--and that's what seems kind of silly to me.

Because some of them take themselves quite seriously and they're multi-million dollar projects. Dawn of Justice is probably the poster boy for a comic book film that took itself far too seriously and was largely a crap movie.

What you two are trying to discern between, in my opinion, is judging a film as a film and judging a film for its entertainment value. It's sometimes a good idea to view them as separate things to give yourself different perspective then judging those two values together. Sticking with my example, I found parts of Dawn of Justice entertaining, but I also think some of the casting, acting and writing made it a bad film.

 

[huKSer]

LOMS said: You can understand the source material and still come to an informed decision of these movies being a result of poor filmmaking.

​Totally understand that.

But people are taking these comic book super hero movies so seriously--and that's what seems kind of silly to me.

Because some of them take themselves quite seriously and they're multi-million dollar projects. Dawn of Justice is probably the poster boy for a comic book film that took itself far too seriously and was largely a crap movie.

What you two are trying to discern between, in my opinion, is judging a film as a film and judging a film for its entertainment value. It's sometimes a good idea to view them as separate things to give yourself different perspective then judging those two values together. Sticking with my example, I found parts of Dawn of Justice entertaining, but I also think some of the casting, acting and writing made it a bad film.

And a counter example would be some artsy French movie with subtitles. Very finely crafted film but B O R I N G

 

[Enhance]

And a counter example would be some artsy French movie with subtitles. Very finely crafted film but B O R I N G

Precisely.
People judge movies differently, but personally, I can watch a movie and find it entertaining while simultaneously thinking it's not a very good movie. Vice versa, I can think a movie is pretty good while not really finding it entertaining or wanting to ever watch it again (i.e. Requiem for a Dream).

 

[VectorVictor]

LOMS said: You can understand the source material and still come to an informed decision of these movies being a result of poor filmmaking.

​Totally understand that.

But people are taking these comic book super hero movies so seriously--and that's what seems kind of silly to me.

Because some of them take themselves quite seriously and they're multi-million dollar projects. Dawn of Justice is probably the poster boy for a comic book film that took itself far too seriously and was largely a crap movie.

What you two are trying to discern between, in my opinion, is judging a film as a film and judging a film for its entertainment value. It's sometimes a good idea to view them as separate things to give yourself different perspective then judging those two values together. Sticking with my example, I found parts of Dawn of Justice entertaining, but I also think some of the casting, acting and writing made it a bad film.

And a counter example would be some artsy French movie with subtitles. Very finely crafted film but B O R I N G

I dunno, Amélie was entertaining...

And don't forget that we're not talking about stand-alone movies with recently created characters--this is an exercise in cinematic world-building with characters that have established canon (some of which is 75+ years old), which requires a different type of investment on the part of the fan. It's why the DC movies are (justifiably IMO) being scrutinized to hell, and why DC tapping Joss Whedon is perhaps the smartest thing the execs at WB have done this side of Wonder Woman and Patti Jenkins.

 

[RedDenver]

I'll wait for it to come out on Netflix or Amazon.

 

[Landlord]

And a counter example would be some artsy French movie with subtitles. Very finely crafted film but B O R I N G

Precisely.
People judge movies differently, but personally, I can watch a movie and find it entertaining while simultaneously thinking it's not a very good movie. Vice versa, I can think a movie is pretty good while not really finding it entertaining or wanting to ever watch it again (i.e. Requiem for a Dream).

BvS was neither

 

[Apathy]

With every new trailer of JL coming out, I'm getting the feeling like this movie is going to blow and I feel less enthused about it. I don't want it to because I prefer the darker tones of the DC movies than Marvel but I think we're going to get another DC dud......still going to go see it in the theaters though.

 

[Mavric]

[No message]

 

[RedDenver]

 

[Enhance]

Sounds like they're trying to polish a turd.

 

[Mavric]

 

[RedDenver]

22 hours ago, Mavric said:

DC is really going to do a Zack Snyder super hero movie again?