Return To: Board Index | General Discussion

subjective/objective standards

Introduce yourself to the community or chat with other users about whatever is on your mind
Bojangles
Posts: 909
2611 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 10:01 pm

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby Bojangles » Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:12 pm

I don't hate people for liking obscure stuff, but some people make a concerted effort to push away ANYTHING mainstream, like it makes them cooler to like stuff I've ever heard of. I feel the same way about people who can only bring themselves to like indie music. They don't like it because it's techinically sound or sophisticated, they only like it because it's obscure. I'm probably just speaking out of hate b/c of some people I've come across who think their tastes are better than everyone else which we all know is impossible. I don't even know if I'm making any sense right now, so I'll end it here.

KGB
Posts: 746
1335 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 12:44 am

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby KGB » Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:53 am

No, it does make sense... I just don't think you can judge a person so quickly. Some people might apriciate only independent music/films for their unique elements that can't otherwise be found in mainstream. Then again, ever since Nirvana alternative/indie bands have been aproaching the mainstream, to such levels that today I believe 'indie' is barely a name (Radiohead, Arcade Fire, Franz Ferdinand... You could easily sign them to Warner and let them maintain an 'indie' status).

AFlickering
Posts: 557
2131 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:15 pm

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby AFlickering » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:30 am

Franz Ferdinand don't deserve to be in that list. :P

Yeah, you get a lot of elitist obscurist types in metal (my background), there are tons of people who claim they like stuff just 'cause it makes them seem knowledgable or whatever. Hell, I used to do that once upon a time. It's retarded. Still, I agree with KBG as well, sometimes these accusations are thrown at people who genuinely do just happen to largely like obscure films/music.

krmr
Posts: 5
1476 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 6:22 pm

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby krmr » Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:27 am

I think ratings should be completely subjective. Isn't the basic principle of film to entertain? So if I find something utterly entertaining I'm going to rank it higher than something that may have been a greater exercise in film making but just didn't interest me. But I can find great examples in film making entertaining simply because of my awe in their achievement, so it certainly helps a movie to be well made to me.

Freder
Posts: 9
1071 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:18 pm

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby Freder » Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:57 pm

I'll go one step further and say that all good criticism is subjective -- and if it isn't, the critic isn't doing his or her job. When you follow a critic's writings over time, you learn where they stand on things and this lends value to everything they write. There used to be one local critic in the Portland area that I read all the time . . . eventually I learned that his views and mine were exactly the opposite on every single movie. This actually made him the most reliable critic I've ever known -- because if he hated it, I knew that the chances were good it would appeal to me.
THE GODFATHER and NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN are proof positive that even movies that are indisputably great are not everybody's cup of fur. They're not _my_ cup of fur, for example! On the other hand, if I dropped the name of my all-time favorite movie here, it would probably get me laughed out of the forum!
I often think that people should keep two lists -- a "Best" list and a "Favorites" list. CITIZEN KANE legitimately belongs at or near the top of anyone's "Best" list -- but can anyone say that it's one of their favorites?

AFlickering
Posts: 557
2131 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:15 pm

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby AFlickering » Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:27 pm

Freder wrote:I often think that people should keep two lists -- a "Best" list and a "Favorites" list. CITIZEN KANE legitimately belongs at or near the top of anyone's "Best" list -- but can anyone say that it's one of their favorites?


This is a pretty complex issue, though. It's not like there's some objective perspective by which "best" can be measured, there are only individuals with their preferences. It seems sort of weak to have a conception of "best" which doesn't correspond with your own tastes, suggests there's some higher authority to which we ought to bow regardless of our own feelings. Saying "it's great but I didn't like it because..." is basically the same as saying "an undesirable part of myself prevents me from accessing the truth of this film" or something like that. My question would be what's the basis for saying such a thing?

KGB
Posts: 746
1335 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 12:44 am

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby KGB » Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:09 pm

I can. 'Citizen Kane' is one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen.
And as I said, a good critic should have both inside him... I might not like a film and admit it, but I also give it credit for it's esthetic, visual and technical value. If a film is a masterpiece, but yet don't appeal to me... Well, I'll have to find something in between for the film.

snarky
Posts: 8
617 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:39 am

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby snarky » Tue Apr 01, 2008 5:49 pm

My ratings on the site are completely subjective. If you look at my top films there's more than a few godawful pieces of trash that I found horribly entertaining because they were godawful pieces of trash (Planet Terror, Stay Alive) and some brilliant masterpieces of film that I simply didn't like (The Zeferelli Romeo and Juliet, Wizard of Oz) that I recognize are amazing works, but I just can't stand them.

My reviews however, do point out my own personal bias.

I see it the same way as music. I respect what some films have done for the industry, and how much of a work of art they are, the same as I respect the Beatles for revolutionizing music. It doesn't mean that I have to like them though. It just means I have to respect them for what they've done.

Philip
Posts: 70
537 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:35 pm

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby Philip » Wed Apr 02, 2008 7:45 pm

I got this very feeling when watching "There Will Be Blood". Looking back, I couldn't find one single thing that I can say I thought was bad, but I still didn't care for it. It didn't stick in any way, I wasn't affected by it and I walked out of the theatre feeling nothing.
At the same time, I don't think I've ever been as absorbed by a movie as I was by "Spiderman 3". I know what you're thinking, "Spiderman 3? Well that's a piece of crap!" and yes, you're probably right and I can almost swear I would hate it, would I ever watch it again. But sitting there in the movie theatre, I completely disappeared into the movie. I forgot where I was, I forgot time, I forgot to eat my popcorn... I forgot pretty much everything, but I still can't find a single reason for why that piece of crap film did that to me. I supposed the mood you're in when you watch it play a big part, but that can't really fully explain it. Maybe my expectations where just very low, or I just simply shut my brain of, I don't know.

livelove
Posts: 622
66 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

Re: subjective/objective standards

Postby livelove » Sun Sep 22, 2019 4:14 am

TheAlliance wrote:i sometimes end up lowering later, after i totally forgot the feeling i had about the movie, and i only remember the storyline/level of acting etc.
that's actually a good argument for NOT altering the vote later on, when one has "totally forgotten the feeling I had about the movie":

www.criticker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7359 wrote:The problem is that, by definition, one doesn't know, what one forgot. So if you gave the film a score of 70 and 4 weeks later you downgrade your vote to 60 or 65, chances are that you don't actively recall the stuff contributing to the 5 or 10 point difference.


Return to “General Discussion”