Search found 1 match: John Lithgow

livelove wrote:To get back to the original topic:

I stipulate that nobody LIKES to be sad.
I further stipulate that most people prefer to feel good than to feel bad/sad.

So
how much can you like a sad film, which will make you feel sad, if you don't like to feel sad ?
how much can you like a depressing film, which will make you feel depressed, if you don't like feeling depressed ?

Folks who rate a film on the basis of film-making craftsmanship obviously don't suffer from this dilemma at all.
But folks who (like me) rate a film just on the basis of how much they LIKE a film, don't they like a film better if it gives them feelings they like (feel good) as opposed to sad/depressed feelings ?

Some folks here (again, this includes me) said, they rate a film based on how much they ENJOY it. But who "enjoys" being sad ?

This is what makes it very difficult to rate "not feelgood-films" (feelbad-films),
and even more difficult to compare a feelgood film to a feelbad film and try to give them rankings which fit individually but also stand the comparison against each other ...

For example, Celda 211 is an excellent film IMHO, but not one of which you can say, once it is over: "I enjoyed it" ...
The same holds true for films dealing with rape for example ... who "enjoys" that ?

I have seen an excellent "stalker film", which is so terrifying, frightening and outright painful to watch ... any way you put it, it's not something I "enjoyed". So simply on the basis of how much I "enjoyed" the film, I rated it 60/100. And yet, I feel that it's a bit unfair to the film, because it's a masterpiece and I really think, no film dealing with that subject could be any more "enjoyable", that's outright impossible.

I tried my best to explain my dilemma.
Can you see it ?