Oh I'm sorry, Did I Break Your Conversation........Well Allow Me A Movie Thread by S&T

[Bronson]

That wasn't even, like, REMOTELY funny.

I agree with you 100%. Not funny at all.

However, I never thought I would see you type this statement. Slowly, but surely I was beginning to get the impression that you laugh at just about anything

And I’m talking just about anything

Like if someone told you a “knock knock” joke, this would be your reaction

 

[darthska]

Can you recognize things are good, but not for you?

Sweatergawd I hate this argument.

If I say 'These eggs are delicious,' it shouldn't have to qualified with 'According to me and only me, these eggs are delicious but that does not represent the opinion of everyone else or every anyone else. When I say that these eggs are delicious, I am only speaking to my opinion.'

All of that is understood when I read someone else's opinion. Unless someone says 'I'm speaking for the group when I say this...', then I understand that their opinion represents a whole 1 person: their self.

People need to see 'In my opinion' before every opinion in order to process that the person is only speaking of their opinion and it's annoying af.

Like I recognize the Beatles are arguably the best band in history, but I don’t like them?

like I recognize that Taylor Swift, Elvis, Elton John, Madonna are the most successful musical artists in the history of music, making them objectively GOOD, but I don’t personally like them?

Or do you lean more towards the camp of “since I don’t like that thing, then that thing sucks.”

I wouldn't call something good that other people liked but I didn't. That sets up this dynamic where opinions are reliant on each other. Also annoying af.

I don't think that damn boat movie is a good movie. 'What?! But BOX OFFICE SALES!' Tickets that other people bought has NOTHING to do with my critique.

Can't stand Taylor Swift. Never was a Belieber. 'But MILLIONS go to their concerts!!' My criteria for 'Good Musical Act' does not include 'Other people like them.'

tl,dr: The older I get, the more I observe that people don't know how to have their own opinion, free from the opinions of others.

 

[darthska]

Slowly, but surely I was beginning to get the impression that you laugh at just about anything

Yeah you are definitely not paying attention then. When someone said ROFL, do you think that they literally were on the floor... rolling?

 

[tr1ll]

Straight up, that probably wasn't the best clip to showcase Tropic Thunder and Pitch Perfect aint for everyone.

 

[Bronson]

When someone said ROFL, do you think that they literally were on the floor... rolling?

Obviously not, but that’s a clear indication that they found something funny

 

[moderndarwin]

Sweatergawd I hate this argument.

If I say 'These eggs are delicious,' it shouldn't have to qualified with 'According to me and only me, these eggs are delicious but that does not represent the opinion of everyone else or every anyone else. When I say that these eggs are delicious, I am only speaking to my opinion.'

All of that is understood when I read someone else's opinion. Unless someone says 'I'm speaking for the group when I say this...', then I understand that their opinion represents a whole 1 person: their self.

People need to see 'In my opinion' before every opinion in order to process that the person is only speaking of their opinion and it's annoying af.

I wouldn't call something good that other people liked but I didn't. That sets up this dynamic where opinions are reliant on each other. Also annoying af.

I don't think that damn boat movie is a good movie. 'What?! But BOX OFFICE SALES!' Tickets that other people bought has NOTHING to do with my critique.

Can't stand Taylor Swift. Never was a Belieber. 'But MILLIONS go to their concerts!!' My criteria for 'Good Musical Act' does not include 'Other people like them.'

tl,dr: The older I get, the more I observe that people don't know how to have their own opinion, free from the opinions of others.

opinions aren’t a vacuum though and you are subjected to the forces of marketing and public sway just like anyone else.

It’s why when they do something like a blind taste test that people actually have a very hard time differentiating between what they thought they “liked” and what they didn’t.

No one is having opinions free from the opinions of others that’s not really how the human mind works. We’re wired to want acceptance and inclusion.

Good is just a matter of popularity by that token. There is no objective truth of what good eggs are. it’s not like gravity. it’s a subjective choice. and if more people agree on one version of it that’s the closest we can come to defining something as good.

 

[darthska]

Obviously not, but that’s a clear indication that they found something funny

Someone who's favorite movies are Room, Antwone Fisher, Good Will Hunting, Precious, and Silver Linings Playbook, would you say they seem like a person who laughs at everything?

 

[darthska]

Good is just a matter of popularity by that token.

That's not the only token, though.
The collective token is not the only token.
The influenced token is not the only token.

And I'm not denying influence. I'm saying that's not all that matters, and for me personally... in my opinion... speaking only for myself... not representing everyone else... not representing anyone else... not disrespecting anyone else... no consideration for anyone else... unconcerned with anyone else... ambivalent to everyone else... just me speaking on only me...

Other criteria are necessary outside of 'Is it popular?' in order for me to call something good.

A terrible movie can be popular, but because it's so popular, there are those that would call it good. That's not me.

'Good' and 'popular' are not hand in hand. They CAN be, but it's not a rule that if it's popular, it's good.

 

[kingkoopa]

RIP. 2 Corey’s was a great era

This pic just jogged memories I forgot I had…..

 

[tr1ll]

THATS THAT ****!!!! An EARLY Jack Black and Seth Green appearances.

 

[tr1ll]

I almost forgot AND Joker from Next Friday

 

[big j 33]

This pic just jogged memories I forgot I had…..

This movie is a true classic.

 

[calibeebee]

Sweatergawd I hate this argument.

If I say 'These eggs are delicious,' it shouldn't have to qualified with 'According to me and only me, these eggs are delicious but that does not represent the opinion of everyone else or every anyone else. When I say that these eggs are delicious, I am only speaking to my opinion.'

All of that is understood when I read someone else's opinion. Unless someone says 'I'm speaking for the group when I say this...', then I understand that their opinion represents a whole 1 person: their self.

People need to see 'In my opinion' before every opinion in order to process that the person is only speaking of their opinion and it's annoying af.

I wouldn't call something good that other people liked but I didn't. That sets up this dynamic where opinions are reliant on each other. Also annoying af.

I don't think that damn boat movie is a good movie. 'What?! But BOX OFFICE SALES!' Tickets that other people bought has NOTHING to do with my critique.

Can't stand Taylor Swift. Never was a Belieber. 'But MILLIONS go to their concerts!!' My criteria for 'Good Musical Act' does not include 'Other people like them.'

tl,dr: The older I get, the more I observe that people don't know how to have their own opinion, free from the opinions of others.

That’s……….what I was asking……..

Good means good to you. Got it.

 

[calibeebee]

This pic just jogged memories I forgot I had…..

THIS WAS MY FAVORITE FILM GROWING UP!!!

 

[Bronson]

'Good' and 'popular' are not hand in hand. They CAN be, but it's not a rule that if it's popular, it's good.

You say good and popular are not hand in hand, and this is true.

But, like you said, they can be. Let’s explore an example:

That “dam boat movie” was popular

But that same movie was deemed fit to be nominated for fourteen academy awards by The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences

 

[darthska]

That’s……….what I was asking……..

Good means good to you. Got it.

No, but I'm saying, it's annoying that we even have to ask that. When someone calls something good, how do people think that is even possible that they're speaking for a collective? What mental process is taking place for people to think someone says 'Good' and they are speaking for multiple people? I don't even understand how that question even comes up. 'Now when you say good, are you speaking for yourself or yourself plus a whole bunch of others? Why would someone even think that's what was meant?

"Man, this salad is good."
"Now, when you say good, do you mean that you think it's good, or do you mean that you've already polled the entire restaurant and they all think it's good?"

Me. Duh. Why would you even think I meant a collective?

It's a pointless qualifier that I truly don't understand and just wastes time.

If you said something was terrible, I wouldn't think 'Wow, I didn't know that his whole group and his whole family and his whole neighborhood thought that the movie was terrible.'

 

[p0tat0 5alad]

It’s fun to talk about movies, actors, genres, scenes, careers, what worked for you, what didn’t work for you, etc. The moment good or bad come into the equation the conversation gets much less nuanced.

 

[darthska]

People are just conflating 'good' and 'popular.'

 

[Bronson]

People are just conflating 'good' and 'popular.'

Not at all Ska. We understand what you’re saying. No disrespect.

Like Twilight is popular but NOT good

Good Will Hunting was popular (an impressive number 10 on the domestic box office) AND a great movie

 

[darthska]

Not at all Ska. We understand what you’re saying. No disrespect.

Like Twilight is popular but NOT good

Good Will Hunting was popular (an impressive number 10 on the domestic box office) AND a great movie

From what you just said, you're not conflating 'popular' and 'good' but I didn't say just you were.
I said people are.
And people are.

 

[calibeebee]

No, but I'm saying, it's annoying that we even have to ask that. When someone calls something good, how do people think that is even possible that they're speaking for a collective? What mental process is taking place for people to think someone says 'Good' and they are speaking for multiple people? I don't even understand how that question even comes up. 'Now when you say good, are you speaking for yourself or yourself plus a whole bunch of others? Why would someone even think that's what was meant?

"Man, this salad is good."
"Now, when you say good, do you mean that you think it's good, or do you mean that you've already polled the entire restaurant and they all think it's good?"

Me. Duh. Why would you even think I meant a collective?

It's a pointless qualifier that I truly don't understand and just wastes time.

If you said something was terrible, I wouldn't think 'Wow, I didn't know that his whole group and his whole family and his whole neighborhood thought that the movie was terrible.'

That’s what I was trying to differentiate. The difference between thinking something is well made or not, vs whether you personally like it or not is all I’m saying.

I recognize something can be good, and that I can personally detest it because I cannnot get over my personal irrational bias of said thing.

“Did you like Brokeback mountain?”

“NO! A man sleeping with another man disgusts me. So that movie sucks!”

Vs.


“Oh. I don’t like the thought of sleeping with another man. But I recognize BM is a well made movie that just might not be for me. Based on xyz.”

I’m not saying you are making any of these arguments. I’m not even arguing with or against you. Just trying to hear your POV so I can understand what it means when you say a movie is good or bad. I’m getting close I think.

 

[darthska]

That’s what I was trying to differentiate. The difference between thinking something is well made or not, vs whether you personally like it or not is all I’m saying.

I recognize something can be good, and that I can personally detest it because I cannnot get over my personal irrational bias of said thing.

“Did you like Brokeback mountain?”

“NO! A man sleeping with another man disgusts me. So that movie sucks!”

Vs.


“Oh. I don’t like the thought of sleeping with another man. But I recognize BM is a well made movie that just might not be for me. Based on xyz.”

I’m not saying you are making any of these arguments. I’m not even arguing with or against you. Just trying to hear your POV so I can understand what it means when you say a movie is good or bad. I’m getting close I think.

Even 'Well made' can suffer the same confusion we're having right now with 'good'. The problem here isn't the semantics of 'good' or 'well made' or 'high quality' or 'enjoyable' or any other descriptors.

The problem is thinking that some things stand for a collective when it belongs only to be individual.

'This is spicy.'
I process that as that single individual thinks that single item is spicy.
The problem here is that 'This is spicy' is being received as 'Everyone thinks this is spicy' when that's not with the individual said.
Then the person with the interpretation responds with 'Well, it's their best selling item so apparently it's not very spicy.'

No, it is, to the individual that said that, and the fact that a bunch of people bought it doesn't mean that it is no longer spicy to the individual who said it.

It's not just that when I say something good I'm only talking about me. Whenever anyone says something is good, when someone walks out of a movie theater and goes 'Oh man, that was so good,' I don't see how someone can interpret that as 'Oh, they are speaking for the entire theater that just watched the movie.'

No, they're not. There's no need to even ask them 'Are you saying that you think it's good? Or everyone who was in the theater with you?' It's a pointless question that just wastes time.

Opinions are individual unless otherwise noted and I don't know how people have landed on a point past that understanding.

 

[DeadsetAce]

 

[calibeebee]

Even 'Well made' can suffer the same confusion we're having right now with 'good'. The problem here isn't the semantics of 'good' or 'well made' or 'high quality' or 'enjoyable' or any other descriptors.

The problem is thinking that some things stands for a collective when it belongs only to be individual.

'This is spicy.'
I process that as that single individual thinks that single item is spicy.
The problem here is that 'This is spicy' is being received as 'Everyone thinks this is spicy' when that's not with the individual said.
Then the person with the interpretation responds with 'Well, it's their best selling item so apparently it's not very spicy.'

No, it is, to the individual that said that, and the fact that a bunch of people bought it doesn't mean that it is no longer spicy to the individual who said it.

It's not just it when I say something good I'm only talking about me. Whenever anyone says something is good, when someone walks out of a movie theater and goes 'Oh man, that was so good,' I don't see how someone can interpret that as 'Oh, they are speaking for the entire theater that just watched the movie.'

No, they're not. There's no need to ask them 'Are you saying that you think it's good? Or everyone who was in the theater with you?' It's a pointless question that just wastes time.

Opinions are individual unless otherwise noted and I don't know how people have landed on a point past that understanding.

I disagree. If someone says “this ketchup is spicy.”

Im gonna ask questions to clarify. Im not gonna assume they meant just to them. Im not gonna assume that it’s spicy. I’m probably gonna find out if the “collective” has deemed it spicy by putting a spicy label on the box. Or maybe see if it’s won any awards for any of its spicy-ness.

But that’s me with other people. Now that I now a little more about you, I can conclude that you said it’s spicy. So you meant it’s spicy and that’s final.

 

[Arthur Shelby]