Red Mosquito

dimejinky99 wrote:

tree_ wrote:Because they're bad answers. Holdo still looks like a terrible leader.

So you’re body shaming her? Cos of the hair?

Thank the maker she’s not fat

I didn't mean physically, dumb dumb

tree_ wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:Remember guys, this movie is objectively bad.

I corrected that with the help of Jorge. There are objectively bad things about this movie, which doesn't necessarily make the movie objectively bad as a whole.

Are there though if others in the thread have liked many/most of the things you have complaints about?

Monkey_Driven wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:Remember guys, this movie is objectively bad.

I corrected that with the help of Jorge. There are objectively bad things about this movie, which doesn't necessarily make the movie objectively bad as a whole.

Are there though if others in the thread have liked many/most of the things you have complaints about?

If something is illogical or is unearned it is bad writing. You're free to like something that is poorly done. It doesn't mean it was well done.

tree_ wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

tree_ wrote:Because they're bad answers. Holdo still looks like a terrible leader.

So you’re body shaming her? Cos of the hair?

Thank the maker she’s not fat

I didn't mean physically, dumb dumb

You have intentionally misunderstood and misconstrued every single answer given to you over two days. Who can even tell what you mean? I can’t.

tree_ wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:Remember guys, this movie is objectively bad.

I corrected that with the help of Jorge. There are objectively bad things about this movie, which doesn't necessarily make the movie objectively bad as a whole.

Are there though if others in the thread have liked many/most of the things you have complaints about?

If something is illogical or is unearned it is bad writing. You're free to like something that is poorly done. It doesn't mean it was well done.

I think I'm done here.

tree_ wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:Remember guys, this movie is objectively bad.

I corrected that with the help of Jorge. There are objectively bad things about this movie, which doesn't necessarily make the movie objectively bad as a whole.

Are there though if others in the thread have liked many/most of the things you have complaints about?

If something is illogical or is unearned it is bad writing. You're free to like something that is poorly done. It doesn't mean it was well done.

If something in a film either in writing or portrayed isn’t to your liking, and you then go on to claim it’s objectively poor, the problem is you. Not the film. And after it starts all been explained to you at length. Repeatedly? That’s a level of self entitled narcissism I can’t even grasp.

There are qualities that can be measured. When looking at a video game, you can tell if the controls are responsive, if the graphics are up to par with other games of the same generation, etc... The same sort of judgement can be applied to writing.

Cocaine is a helluva drug

tree_ wrote:There are qualities that can be measured. When looking at a video game, you can tell if the controls are responsive, if the graphics are up to par with other games of the same generation, etc... The same sort of judgement can be applied to writing.

Interesting you picked video games as a comparison. A platform where you control the character and the story and outcome. Thats Telling.

dimejinky99 wrote:If something in a film either in writing or portrayed isn’t to your liking, and you then go on to claim it’s objectively poor, the problem is you. Not the film. And after it starts all been explained to you at length. Repeatedly? That’s a level of self entitled narcissism I can’t even grasp.

This is ridiculous. Either things add up or they don't. This writing conflicts itself. Holdo makes objectively bad choices and then is made to look like a hero/great leader. She praises Poe behind his back then treats him like an idiot. There's nothing subjective about the quality of writing here. It's bad.

tree_ wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:Remember guys, this movie is objectively bad.

I corrected that with the help of Jorge. There are objectively bad things about this movie, which doesn't necessarily make the movie objectively bad as a whole.

Well, I'd urge you to consider further refining this.

dimejinky99 wrote:

tree_ wrote:There are qualities that can be measured. When looking at a video game, you can tell if the controls are responsive, if the graphics are up to par with other games of the same generation, etc... The same sort of judgement can be applied to writing.

Interesting you picked video games as a comparison. A platform where you control the character and the story and outcome. Thats Telling.

I wasn't talking about those things.... If one were to judge the portion of the story in which they are in control in a video game... that's a different concept entirely.

tree_ wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:

tree_ wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:Remember guys, this movie is objectively bad.

I corrected that with the help of Jorge. There are objectively bad things about this movie, which doesn't necessarily make the movie objectively bad as a whole.

Are there though if others in the thread have liked many/most of the things you have complaints about?

If something is illogical or is unearned it is bad writing. You're free to like something that is poorly done. It doesn't mean it was well done.

But do you see the issue here? It isn't poorly done. If I think it's well done, it isn't objectively bad.

tree_ wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

tree_ wrote:There are qualities that can be measured. When looking at a video game, you can tell if the controls are responsive, if the graphics are up to par with other games of the same generation, etc... The same sort of judgement can be applied to writing.

Interesting you picked video games as a comparison. A platform where you control the character and the story and outcome. Thats Telling.

I wasn't talking about those things.... If one were to judge the portion of the story in which they are in control in a video game... that's a different concept entirely.

Hold the doll and point to the spots that Star Wars hurt you.

tree_ wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:If something in a film either in writing or portrayed isn’t to your liking, and you then go on to claim it’s objectively poor, the problem is you. Not the film. And after it starts all been explained to you at length. Repeatedly? That’s a level of self entitled narcissism I can’t even grasp.

This is ridiculous. Either things add up or they don't. This writing conflicts itself. Holdo makes objectively bad choices and then is made to look like a hero/great leader. She praises Poe behind his back then treats him like an idiot. There's nothing subjective about the quality of writing here. It's bad.

I disagree. I think the writing here is subtle, well-earned, and effective. Your reduction of those scenes the issue.

But I am glad you can see that Holdo does make bad choices (though again, I wouldn't qualify them as "objectively" bad) and is still remembered as a hero for her final choice. Which, may also have been a bad choice, depending on your point of view. That's a good observation. It's interesting how both things can be true and it illuminates one of the key themes of the film.

Wow is Laura Dern’s character really named Holdo? Lolllll

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Wow is Laura Dern’s character really named Holdo? Lolllll

Amilyn Holdo, in fact.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Wow is Laura Dern’s character really named Holdo? Lolllll

LV, do you think a movie can have objectively good/bad elements?

tree_ wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Wow is Laura Dern’s character really named Holdo? Lolllll

LV, do you think a movie can have objectively good/bad elements?

No, not really. I think you can argue whether an element is bad or good using semi-objective evidence, but ultimately, “bad” or “good” is a judgment that is inherently subjective.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

tree_ wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Wow is Laura Dern’s character really named Holdo? Lolllll

LV, do you think a movie can have objectively good/bad elements?

No, not really. I think you can argue whether an element is bad or good using semi-objective evidence, but ultimately, “bad” or “good” is a judgment that is inherently subjective.

What if, instead of using good and bad, we judge whether it was successful at achieving its goal, assuming we can know what the goal is?