Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Is your head up your ass to the warmth ? I never told you to like or not like something. I have no idea of where you got that from. I'll say it again in case you didn't understand. There are popular things that are only popular because people talk about them so much that a lot of people think they're a lot better than they actually are. There ARE bad movies they you can enjoy for the cheesy-ness. And there are good movies that you may not necessarily like just because they're not your type of movie. But there are also movies that are horribly made or badly acted and are just horrible. Anyone can like any movie they choose, but you should be able to recognise if a movie is bad or good. What about that can't you understand ?

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

But not all of us have that particular gift, which is why we're so grateful to have you, The Arbiter of Good and Bad, to guide us. Your rarefied insights are appreciated so very much.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Again, as I said, there are movies that are bad and movies that are good. Anyone can like any movie, good or bad, that they choose. I have NEVER said that they couldn't. Just because you like a movie doesn't make it good. And just because you hate a movie doesn't mean it's bad. There are well made movies that I, and others, don't like. And there are bad movies that I, and others DO like. How can you not understand that ? I've said it several times already, and I'm getting sick and tired of explaining how that works. For example, I like Pathfinder, which is a bad movie. Bad, predictable acting. But I can like it if I want. I have never said that you shouldn't like a movie just because it's bad. So, please take your sarcastic self out of this thread and leave it for people that actually want to contribute a thought that is capable of being discussed, alright ?

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Here's the thing. So far, what you've said about the movies you dislike is that they are "bad," "boring" and/or "pretentious." The first two characterizations are entirely subjective. There is no way you can quantify "bad" or "boring" in a meaningful way. "Pretentious" is an easier label to slap on a movie (American Beauty is my go-to example, what with that bag in the wind shot), but even then it's arguable.

In short, none of the things you've said about movies can be proven as "true." You'll be better served to quit insisting your opinion is fact and simply accept that it's how you feel about a given movie. It's okay. I'm sure you probably had a teacher who told you that, in a debate, you should never present your side as being an opinion. That's only for certain contexts. Discussing art isn't one of them.

Allow me to demonstrate:

I personally can find no redeeming qualities of Hulk. The screen was entirely too dark for too much of the time, I never found a reason to invest myself in the story or its characters and the closest i came to feeling excitement was when Hulk fought a tank...because it was like watching someone else play a video game I know I'd be no good at playing myself.

Notice I took responsibility for the opinion as my own, and I refrained from insisting that any of the flaws I found with it were inherently part of the film. Someone else may have loved it, but by framing my remarks as my personal opinion and being more specific than just "bad," "boring" and/or "pretentious," I've given them something to address.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

See, what you don't seem to fucking grasp - as if folks here are speaking to a particularly obtuse second-grader - is that you don't decide for anyone else what is good and what is bad. It's purely a subjective valuation, yet you continually chime in with unsolicited declarations that so-and-so is "good", "sucks", "boring", blah, blah, blah, instead of "I found ______ boring/great/terrible", something everyone could at the very least least tolerate as as opinion (look it up), however outlandish it may be. You're like one of those yutzes who interrupts conversations loudly and often with ill-informed, annoying "statements of fact". The person at the party who walks up ready to bloviate, and everyone in a little grouping "ahems" awkwardly and excuses himself to go to the bathroom. As numerous others have written, get over yourself.
I shall decide that on my own. Your input on the matter has been noted and duly discarded. However, I do tend to have little time and patience for interlocutions with brick walls, especially arrogant ones, so I think I'll leave you alone here with the one or two people still willing to engage your narcissism.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I agree with everything you said except for the part about me stating my opinion as fact. I have never done that. I have said there are good movies and bad movies. People can like what they want. I've never said anything to the contrary. There are bad movies that I like and good movies that I like. I've taken responsibility for my opinion as my own. If I had just said that a certain movie is bad without backing anything up, I could see your point. But I've said repeatedly that there are reasons that a movie can be badly made. But I never said you were stupid or dumb for liking those movies.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I never said that I decide for other people what is good and what is bad. What I said, was that there are movies that are quite obviously bad. Wether it's because of bad acting or bad effects, or whatever. But that doesn't mean that someone can't like them. Another example, I like Baby : The Lost Legend, but the effects and acting are very bad. How dare you call me narcissistic ? I don't know where you got that from. And arrogant ? That's completely not true. I never once called someone stupid or anything of the kind because of the kinds of movies they like. You seem to like putting words in peoples' mouths. I could understand your "point" if I had said a movie was crap. But I haven't. There is a difference between being crap and being bad. If I said a movie was crap, that's an opinion. If I said a movie was bad, that can be an objective fact. If a movie is bad, it could be because of bad CGI, flat acting, or derivative plot. You say I'm trying to put my opinions as facts ? You've done nothing but do the same thing, but for some reason I'M the bad guy ? I don't know why you have the problems you have, but please seek help.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Good or bad is not always subjective. If I had just said that a movie was bad without saying anything else, that's being subjective. Can't you agree that a movie can be badly made ? If it can, than it's a bad movie, right ?

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

You did it right there. You claim your opinion of Natilie Portman is a FACT. It is not.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

You don't listen to anybody, do you? It's not even worth trying to explain anything to you anymore.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

The microcosm of the entire debate, right here. And yes, by their very definitions, both terms are subjective.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I think that we can all agree on one thing, though. There ARE movies that are badly made, aren't there ? Just as there are movies that are well made. Wether you like them or don't like them. You can like bad movies just as well as you can like good movies, but should be able to admit if a movie you like is bad or not. I like Masters Of The Universe and I don't think that anyone can argue that it's a well made movie. It's full of cheese and high school drama class level acting. But I like it, and I can admit that it's a bad movie.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

We can all agree that there are bad movies, but we may not agree on what they are, or what makes them so. Moreover, even if we were all in agreement about what and why, it wouldn't actually be proof that the movie was, in fact, bad. It would merely prove that we all agreed we found it to be bad.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

You're not understanding me. You have to agree that there are movies that are badly made, wether it's cheap sets, wooden acting, or obvious CGI. If someone likes movies like that, fine. But it's still a bad movie. I never said that anybody shouldn't like it. If there's a good movie but you hate it, you'll think it's a bad movie. But that doesn't make it a bad movie. It just means that you didn't like it. But there ARE movies that are badly made. I like Hobgoblins and it's an extremely bad movie. Horrible, cheap puppets appearing on Earth in a silver painted toybox for a spaceship.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Cheap sets don't make a movie bad. Same with the other elements. If you get hung up on one thing about a movie, that's on you. I get that you're trying to establish a starting point for discussion, but the problem is that the point you're trying to work from hinges on the hypothetical that there is agreement over "good" and "bad" art. Like I said previously, even the most commercial tripe is still art on some level. Batman & Robin was made for the purpose of licensing toys and other merchandise, but we still have to come to it the same way we criticize any other film.

In short, you cannot prove that a movie is "bad." You can articulate what you find weak, ineffective, contradictory, insulting, boring, condescending, pretentious, etc. Even Ebert's "Your Movie Sucks!" series dissects movies by exposing those elements that, for him, failed. But even he doesn't declare that the movies in question are bad as a matter of fact; rather, that they do not hold up to his critical examination of them.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I agree that there are movies that are badly made. Some are even close to being universally acknowledged as bad. The Godfather, however, is not one of them. That's where you lost me.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Exactly ! That's what I've been trying to get across this whole time.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

The Godfather just wasn't exciting. I thought it was boring and bland and flatly acted. And it's just because it's a gangster movie. I like gangster movies. Untouchables, Angels With Dirty Faces, and just about any Humphrey Bogart movie. I just didn't like Godfather.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Okay, when you put it like that and express it as your opinion, then I don't have a problem with it. It seemed earlier that you were stating some irrefutable fact that The Godfather was bad.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I found a great article that expresses what I'm trying to say about The Godfather.
http://eratosspring.wordpress.com/20...the-godfather/

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I would like to also add Indiana Jones IV.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I thought the Godfather was very exciting.

I also thought There Will be Blood was very exciting (another movie you seem to think was boring). When I first bought There Will Be Blood on DVD I watched it 7 times within 3 days.

What is boring and what is exciting is opinion, not fact. To me these movies were exciting.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Indiana Jones 4 was alright....up until the parts with the aliens. I did like seeing Marion again.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

^
You should probably be a bit more careful regarding spoilers. While they don't affect me, they might bother someone who hasn't seen some of these movies.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Correct. I find both Transformers films terribly boring but I'm aware that at least a few people find them entertaining.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

To me, the one thing that saved the Transformers movie from being complete crap was the inclusion of Peter Cullen, who has played him in 2 cartoon series.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Beverly hills Chihuahua...great dog movie

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

One can argue that Ed Wood's PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE (1959) is badly made, based on the cheap sets, the unconvincing effects, the actors who don't seem to share the same idea as to what kind of movie they're in, the botched takes that remain in the film, etc. It's been called the worst movie of all time. But if you've ever seen it with an audience, you've had a great time. I consider it a work of sheer lunatic genius. No film that delightful can be called "bad."

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

There's a big leap in your logic between stating one fact that almost everyone agrees with, namely that some movies are badly made, and using that to justify another "fact" that The Godfather is a bad movie or Natalie Portman is a bad actress (a proposition with which dozens of critics' groups this year would disagree).

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I guess when you try to compare the acting talents of hacks like Marlon Brando, Robert Duvall, Al Pacino, and James Caan to your favorite thespian, Adam Sandler, their acting style would seem boring and bland and flat.

The Godfather is a fascinating study of flawed human character and when paired with Godfather Part II forms a nearly perfect epic tragedy. But it doesn't have Adam Sandler punching out Bob Barker, so I guess it fails to make your grade.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Plan 9 had one thing behind it, heart. Ed tried to make good things but lacked certain things like resources and planning but he did what he could with what he had.

That's the one thing that all these newer horror movies lack when they try to make an intentionally bad film. You can't just intentionally make a bad film that you plan on will becoming a cult classic. They just aren't trying. They're crap that you'd make with friends in high school, only now it's easy enough to get them distributed.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Adam Sandler is hardly my favourite actor. I just happen to like two of his movies.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Fascinating ? Alright. If you say so. I just don't see it. I understand the movie but it's just not exciting. It takes way too long to really get going and when I watched it, it just felt like they were trying way too hard to be like other, better gangster movies. I like everyone in it, but when you put them together, it just didn't work for me.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I know what films could be classified as guilty pleasures.

13 Going on 30.
Charlies Angels Films
Catwoman - Think I am one of five people that own that film.

I have several animated films however I feel fine with everything I own.

Regarding bad movies, I like several films that are entertaining yet poorly plotted, acted etc... I like being entertained. While a movie like Lost In Translation is not poorly, acted or filmed it was just boring to me, it was hard watch because nothing happened. Overall I watch movies or own movies that are not like real life, I want an adventure, action (not completely mindless) thriller etc... Then I like a film like "The Others" which is not a fast film by any means. I rarely like films were the too many people die or the main character does, it can ruin a story for me based on the type of stories I enjoy.

I do wish some of these action adventure films would get a bit more correct, the break the rules of how the world works or common sense far too often. I just pick it apart and enjoy.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I would argue that quite a lot did happen; it was just subtle. I personally loved the movie; I was able to just completely lose myself in Coppola's Tokyo. Then, I first saw it at home on a rainy, lazy afternoon. It perfectly suited the vibe of the day.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Hell Comes to Frogtown

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I did pick it up at a pawn shop for $1.50 so I could try to watch it in one sitting again, to see if my view on it has changed, at the moment I stand on not bad just boring.

No Country For Old Men, I found this movie to be horrible, nothing good happens at all.

A film like Transformers 2 is poorly made, tosses logic and sense out the window yet can be entertaining, I wish they would not toss logic out the window.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

Then it wouldn't be Transformers 2 anymore. It would be the kid and his parents the entire film because there would be no robots.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I still believe you can have some type of logic without a fictional world, I love movies about abilities, magic, etc... take a character like Superman, okay, he has these powers, fine, now everything should make some type of sense within the science of our reality unless it somehow no longer applies. I still think you can have a Transformers movie without being completely foolish.

Movies like The Day After Tomorrow only work if you toss all science out the window, which I guess you could do if you just pretend that this is Earth just different.

Superman Returns did a bit better with the idea of objects being heavy and just because you are strong does not mean you can hold it up without it falling apart, well, aside from the ending, they kind of got his speed wrong though, he is faster then that, basically everything can look like it is not moving to him if he wants, then again the first Superman movie had him too slow to grab a missile and then five minutes later fast enough to go around the world dozens of times a second. Note that I enjoy these films.

Re: Guilty Pleasures ?
 

I like some pretty snooty stuff. By way of example, I own all of Godfrey Reggio's Qatsi trilogy, plus Baraka and Manufactured Landscapes.

But for some reason my high-falutin' taste goes out the window when it comes to nostalgia. I've probably seen Beverly Hills Cop thirty times, just because it was one of the first R-rated movies I ever saw.

Also, for some reason, I hold kung fu and martial arts movies to a different (much lower) standard. I can overlook all sorts of bad plot, editing, acting and production mistakes if there's a nunchaku fight.