-
Saved!You know you lost faith in humanity when Star Wars, and f***ing Lord of the Rings are above Blade Runner...
-
Saved!AramondeEditing … They should be, Why do you think Blade Runner should be higher? -
Saved!UltyEditing … ...maybe because it's better? Maybe because it doesn't try to be pretentious for way too long and just becomes boring (LotR), or isn't as cheesely written and craply acted? (Star Wars) All my opinion, I know everyone loves the shit out of these movies, and I like to speak it... -
Saved!AramondeEditing … I didn't find the acting in BR to be any better. To me BR was a good movie but not great, it gets way to much hype. The best thing about BR to me was the set design.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … The dialogue was excellent, and the story drives itself into such a brilliant finale that it started discussion up until 2005 or something, when Ridley Scott revealed what the ending really meant. The performances were great IMO, they just weren't so in-your-face LOOK AT ME I'M ACTING like in Star Wars. BR had a giant impact on sci-fi (not saying Star Wars didn't), and storytelling in general because of it's brilliant foreshadowing and interpretative plot. In terms of effects, shots and set design it also was a huge mark in filmmaking.
-
Saved!AramondeEditing … Story drives itself and brilliant foreshadowing? I'd have to disagree when Ford's character has to narrate through half the movie. And if your talking about effects and set design SW did the same thing. No one had ever seen effects in a movie like the ones SW had.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … The reason why I believe BR's story is so seamless, like it's "driving itself" (metaphor), is because it's essentialy what Final Fantasy XIII tried to be and failed. The story has barely any exposition, characters don't stop and act stupid to ask what's this and that. Thanks to this the story can flow much better, to a point where you go along with it without even noticing it. It puts alot of questions in the table, kinda like The Matrix did, that made the characters and the overall movie philosophy so rich and fascinating. And you get to know more of the story in such a more interesting way, that attracts you into it and to understand it to a bigger level. The narration is a technique used alot at the time, I agree that sometimes it might seem distracting but luckly it never hurt the storytelling in a way that you could clearly notice it or get pissed at it. Star Wars had revolutionary special effects, but not set design. George Lucas even said it himself, that without 2001 he would go nowhere in terms of special effects. But special effects do NOT make a movie, it's still way too cheesy and the acting is way too hammy. And that hurt the movie alot for me...
-
Saved!Dr EggnogEditing … I like Star Wars and Lord of the Rings. Couldn't get into Blade Runner. -
Saved!Rich .Editing … I think Blade Runner and Star Wars are both a bit overrated myself, even if they're still good. If I want to watch Harrison Ford being awesome I'd say Indiana Jones blows either of those out of the water. As for Lord of the Rings, I get why people find it long but to me it's just epic. That trilogy has so many of my favourite scenes. -
Saved!Tom ShafferEditing … I know right, it's like how can someone have a different opinion from mine? It's insanity.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … ...lol, what? xD
-
Saved!Baron BEditing … ''Stop liking movies I don't like!'' -
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … Ulty you know blade runner was based on a book right. -
Saved!McKayla SellotEditing … Blade Runner was terrible... Nothing happens in that film, plus I didn't need to see Harrison Fords rape-face. -
Saved!Splatterhouse 5Editing … You do know it's a "favorites" list, and not a "best" list, right? Although I like Blade Runner, it's easy to understand how it can be such a love it or hate it affair. I have a ton of guilty pleasures that I'd rather watch than BR. Hell, I have a decent amount of sci-fi that I'd rather watch than BR. I own the collector's version on bluray, and recognize it as a very good movie, but I'm not always in the mood to watch it. It's never a bad time to watch my favorites. -
Saved!McKayla SellotEditing … The whole "it's a "favorites" list, and not a "best" list" line keeps getting said but don't people find that a cop-out? Isn't saying that literally the same as saying "I have poor taste"? It's an immediate apologetic stance for having an opinion, which strikes me as weird. As for Blade Runner, I don't mean that I don't like it, I like cyberpunk and sci-fi in general so should like it. No, when I say it's bad I mean that as a point of fact, it is objectively terrible... You're still welcome to like it, but I would consider anyone claiming that this film is good to be simply wrong, just as they would consider my position wrong. I hate this need in modern times to "respect" everyones opinion as though they're all valid. No, some people are just wrong...
-
Saved!Dr EggnogEditing … If lots of people like it, then it's good. A movie is entertainment; it's designed to be liked. If Blade Runner is objectively bad, then the system of objectivity is flawed. I generally don't try to be objective and accept that I have bad taste. I've accepted it back when I grew up as a Digimon fan while everyone else was liking Pokemon and Dragonball Z. It has to be accepted, because good or bad taste isn't something people choose to have. I tend to apologize for my opinions though, because bad opinions can annoy people, especially if you get too passionate about them.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … I was once like you Kayla, believe me...but no. When it comes to art, NO ONE is right or wrong. NO ONE is the know-all, who can objectively tell why something is undeniably good or bad. If everything was objective, it wouldn't be art. It would be a science...or whatever. We can all comment on how we have the better tastes, and why everyone who loves FFX is an inferior person, but when it comes right down to it the whole point of art is for you to watch and interpret someone else's vision and make up your own conclusions. Liking it or not does not make it objectively good or bad, or everyone on the planet loving or hating it doesn't objectively make it good or bad, but YOU the viewer/listener/player...find it good or bad!
-
Saved!Splatterhouse 5Editing … @McKayla .... Well, it IS a favorites list. I obviously believe every movie in my top 25 to be a great movie, but I'd be silly to expect everyone else to agree with me - There are many more than 25 movies worth loving. Of course, there are some opinions that I'll respect above others, but I don't think there's anything wrong with having preferences. Since different people will tend to appreciate different things, I'd actually see much less personality in someone's opinion if they simply rattled off the AFI's top 25 as their own top 25. Our favorites are always going to be a matter of opinion. I mean, should Citizen Kane be everyone's favorite movie? Should their opinions be worthless if it wasn't?
-
Saved!McKayla SellotEditing … Taste is subjective obviously, people who more appreciate horror as opposed to comedy with have radically different lists but the fact is art isn't ineffable. We can analyse art, and we do have criteria for what makes art good or bad. These are areas of study tbat have existed for centuries. It may upset people to admit it, but our taste in art matures and refines both with age and maturity, as well as with exposure; and having poor taste in art is simply showing a lack of mental or cultural development. Now it's not as simple as just saying Citizen Kane is the best, it's not anyway because we've built on it's themes and expanded and improved on them in later films; but someone who doesn't know why Citizen Kane is so respected probably has poor taste. It's all a matter of understanding the structure of film, Saw is a far better film than Hostal for example but if you dislike horror films you'd hate both, that's the subjective part. I know film quite well, but I know nothing about sculpture or painting. I couldn't explain what makes a good sculpture because my tastes are unrefined. I could "like" one, but it would be based on arbitrary factors not the criteria it should be judged on. This is why I like video games, they're close to film but also not, so my opinion of them is still forming and growing. Fact is though, all art is the expression of humanity via the depictions of emotions and the actualisation of aesthetics; and this can be analysed and deconstructed. The quality of any art is objective, it's appeal is subjective. It's really quite interesting, the depth and complexity of theories of art and psychology and how they link; and interestingly enough this site demonstrates one of them really well (I'll make a forum thread about it if people are interested).
-
Saved!UltyEditing … The reason why that line of thinking is misguided is because ANYONE can just come out and say movie X or game Y is objectively brilliant and then lists a number of reasons for being so. For someone who disagrees, what can he do? Give his own reasons for thinking movie X and game Y are objectively terrible, lists his reasons and proclaim he's right because he went to film/game design school. I've seen it being done thousands of times...you're treating art as if it were a science, a study or whatever. Treating it exactly by the numbers, explaining why this or that shouldn't be done because it's bad defeats the whole purpose of art! I have a friend who went to film school in 2012, so he's been there for 2 years now and he told me something that i'll never forget: "you don't go to film school to learn how to make perfect movies, but to get guidance and knowledge for one day to aspire to make them." Yes, you can analyse art and that's actually one of the many beauties of it but to say you're right because of this and that is just not right. You can learn the structure of film and what makes a solid game mechanic, but the end quality of it is up to the viewer/player to decide because he's the one INTERPRETING said art.
-
Saved!McKayla SellotEditing … That's fair enough but I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I believe that art has one objective method of judgement which is exceptionally complex and relies on the consideration of many varied aesthetics, which individuals value at different subjective levels; but which ultimately are all contained within the whole. Understanding all of these variable aesthetics and judging them objectively is the challenge in critiquing art, and analysis of film (and video games) is no different. I'll agree that there's interpretation involved but not because it's subjective, rather because it's so complex; as complex as the collective human psyche in fact. Just as science is only "best guess", and refines as we get more information about the universe, but will never be perfect; I believe analysis of art in any form is the same. No-one is "right" but as we get better and better at understanding the nature of human aesthetics we can judge it's expressions better. This isn't subjectivity, it's agnostic objectivity. There is a right answer, but we're still working on it. If you don't agree with these premises, we fundamentally disagree on how we perceive art, at which point all I can say is I think you're wrong... but if that's the case you think I'm wrong also, so we'd just have to agree to disagree.
-
Saved!Michael ZEditing … 1 year old, but I only just noticed this, and by jove. Seriously, I don't need some 20-year old telling me they're the supreme oracle who can determine whether a movie is OBJECTIVELY(!) terrible, especially a movie that's been widely lauded for a variety of reasons. That's simply arrogant beyond belief - not to mention descending on a very slippery slope considering it's the kind of crap Goebbels came up with when he talked about "degenerate art", Godwin's Law be damned. -
Saved!UltyEditing … I learned alot from unikGamer and Favslist, when it comes to judging art and stuff. Art is subjective, period. As much as I want to shove it to everyone in the world who likes FFX that it is in fact the worst piece of shit to ever grace humanity, it's still an opinion by some guy who is no more than anyone else. I think the true beauty of art is the fact that many people have different interpretations, not just about what the movie meant but also how good/bad it was for them, which allows for many interesting discussions.
-
Saved!Michael ZEditing … Well said, Ulty. We'll never agree on FFX, but the rest of your post I'm with you 100%. :)
-
Saved!UltyEditing … Oh please, FFX sucks and deep down you know it xD
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … I don't think her being 20 has anything to do with it and the slippery slope to siding with Goebbels line was way over the top (Godwin's law exists for a reason) but you and Ulty are both right about the key point. Art isn't objective, it's open to interpretation. Some people/groups know more about art/entertainment than others but never to the point where they get to be the definitive arbiter of what's great, what's good, what's bad and what's terrible.
-
Saved!Michael ZEditing … Age has nothing to do with it, but lack of life experience does. I don't think someone who says "yeah, movie X sucks, that's an objective fact!" and when pressed on that replies with a long-winded polysyllabic monologue that might look really impressive on the surface but actually says very little at all has a lot of life experience under their belt, though I stand free to be corrected on that issue -- for all I know she could have travelled the glove several times over, written loads of books on cultural theory and given lectures across the world. Who knows. But I doubt it somehow. Regarding the comparison to the erstwhile Minister for Propaganda, I agree that was hyperbolic, but deliberately so - sometimes it's necessary to make a point, especially when an individual acts as if their opinion was law and demands that other people accept it as a Universal Truth.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … I meant her age (and life experience) has nothing to do with it because even if she was the incredibly well travelled veteran cultural theorist that I agree she probably isn't it wouldn't matter. She still wouldn't be able to objectively rule art or entertainment as definitively good or bad because no-one can. A media studies expert speaking from vast experience could probably offer us an interesting perspective on gaming/film etc but it would still be their own subjective perspective.
-
Saved!Not ImportantEditing … Deleted by himself -
Saved!Not ImportantEditing … It's been over a year and I'm still butthurt about someone calling Blade Runner objectively terrible. Even if there were objective standards to film, I don't understand how Blade Runner would be an example of an objectively bad one.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … Yeah, I agree. Blade Runner, to me, is the 2nd greatest sci-fi movie ever made. But again, everyone's entitled to an opinion.
-
Saved!271072aEditing … wow this is probably the longest debate on Favlist. -
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … ID I think theirs a longer debate but I do NT remember what it was about.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … Not counting the forums it might be.
-
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … Perhaps. I live in an autonomous syndicalist commune.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … Not so sure, I think i've seen longer debates. But this was a good one, because it's a topic I love to talk about: objectivity. I still believe there is no objective standard to judge whatever forms of art, in this case film, but it's hard to argue when someone who believes otherwise turns to you and says "So, if there's no objective standards, would you say a film like After Last Season could be considered by anyone as a legitimely good film?" I don't know what to answer, honestly, because After Last Season is just on it's own level of bad xD
-
Saved!271072aEditing … Are we going on to debate two!
-
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … Yeah everything is objective except star wars. If you do NT like it you haven seen it.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … I've seen Star Wars and I think it's ridiculously overrated. Subjectivity in action!
-
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … Richard do you want to start another debate. CAUSE ILL START ANOTHER DEBATE!! J.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … Sure, any opening remarks or should I go first?
-
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … I have some educated remarks like star wars is perfect.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … Round 1 - FIGHT!! *in Shao Kahn voice*
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … Credit where it's due Lightsabers, x wings and death stars are pretty cool, there are some cool lines and iconic scenes and John Williams' soundtrack's great and I also think some parts of the series are better than others but no, just no. The originals have a simplistic central plot of farmboy finds out he's special and saves the word that to me makes it feel like a "my first sci-fi" instead of anything amazing and the Death Star has to be destroyed using a design weakness plot point is lazily used twice (and then again in TFA). They obviously made it up as they went along rather than planning the whole story in advance meaning that in retrospect you've got Obi Wan randomly lying to Luke about his father for no good reason because they hadn't decided Vader was Anakin yet and Leia kissing Luke and then Lucas suddenly deciding they're siblings and making that really awkward. They also devote a third of a film to cutesy alien teddy bears, they've got Boba Fett being a disappointing anti climax of a character and they've got Luke putting away his weapon multiple times in the climactic fight scene even though it's an incredibly dumb thing to do and it doesn't make sense for him to suddenly become a pacifist afraid that killing turns you to the dark side considering the huge body count he's already racked up. The prequels have Jar Jar, they've got aliens that seem to be based on racist stereotypes, they've got original trilogy characters shoehorned in when it doesn't make sense and they've got the high ground not mattering at all in one climactic fight scene and then being the deciding factor in another. They've also got painful dialogue and an unconvincing romance at the centre of the plot, they've got Anakin massacring a small village in the second one and then that just being forgotten about even though Yoda felt it and he outright confessed to Padme, they've got Vader falling to the dark side for the flimsiest of reasons, transitioning from supposed good guy to child killer who'll attack his wife/closest friend almost immediately and then staying evil after his wife dies for no reason at all. The Force Awakens is ridiculously derivative of A New Hope in so many ways, pretty much makes a plot point out of the villain being second rate compared to Darth Vader as though that makes it okay and doesn't really have any iconic scenes or even memorable dialogue that's distinctly its own. I'm not saying the series is bad but it does baffle me how it's so popular and if I was going to argue something was objectively good, Star Wars definitely wouldn't be it. I rest my case. Your move Loughman.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … That's a problem with the writing. George Lucas didn't decide to make them brother and sister until later. Same with Vader being Luke's father. But you bring up lots of good points. I think most of my love for it comes from nostalgia. Same with many.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … Well, that's a bit of a turnaround from I'LL START ANOTHER DEBATE, Star Wars is perfect ;) And here's me thinking you'd get defensive and we'd make this the longest debate on the site for sure.
-
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … Lola no i men that as a joke. God auto correct for chrome sucks sometimes.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … Matrix > Star Wars
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … The first Matrix definitely, I love that film. I prefer some of the Star Wars films to the Matrix sequels though.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … I also loved the sequels, though. Way better films than the prequels, at least. The thing many people miss about the Matrix sequels is that the story was meant to be told through multiple mediums, and combining all of it you get a great story IMO.
-
Saved!Rich .Editing … For me Reloaded has amazing spectacle with the motorway chase and the fight in the Merovingian's Chateau but unlike the first film spectacle's all it had going for it. I think it was too contrived and took the plot and the backstory in a really convoluted direction and then Revolutions was even worse in all those ways without having as much great spectacle to redeem it. I like to treat the original Matrix as a standalone film and pretend the sequels didn't happen.
-
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … Uh oh looks like another debates gonna happen.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … Hahaha, you and most people xD I didn't find the story in the sequels contrived or convoluted at all, I actually thought they followed the first one brilliantly! In the sense that the first one established the setting, concepts and ideas, while the sequels went and explored some of the stuff that the first one mentioned, like the real world and Zion. I will concede that the plots aren't as good as the first one, nor as thoughtfull, but everything was already established so a simple continuation of the story makes sense. Reloaded was the "weakest" for me, since it makes a crucial error near the end by saying The Architect said that in 24 hours after Neo reached The Source, Zion would be destroyed...when in fact that's not what it said at all. Revolutions ended up suffering from this fuckup, but the reason Revolutions is my favorite is because it's the ultimate climax and it ended the series beautifully. I disagree completely with Revolutions not having spectacle, those scenes where they're running away from the sentinels, trying to reach Zion, the scene between Bane and Neo was really cool and tense, the machine war was fucking awesome, and the final fight between Neo and Smith was just sex to me :P And when the war ended, it was the greatest movie moment ever for me because I was watching it in the theater and when Zion starts screaming everyone in that theater, me included, screamed our lungs out in excitement! I'll never forget that moment, and only a truly great movie can provide such a great experience.
-
Saved!271072aEditing … war. war never changes.
-
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … I just got really bored watching both sequels.
-
Saved!UltyEditing … I just love that shit :D But I do get why people would get bored, they're not as well paced as the first one.
-
Saved!Wrl6199Editing … Yeah I like the part where agent smith is about to kiss Morpheus.
-
Deleted!
