What makes a movie "good"?

[Jimothy]

^Agreed.



Flawed logic.

"Good" is an opinion and nothing more.
You can't speak for every human on the face of the planet, therefore, you can't consider The Godfather or Raging Bull universally "good" films by everybody. I think they are some of the finest films ever made, but I can't speak for everyone else.

My logic is flawed?

"Good" is not an opinion. "I think this is good" is an opinion. "Good" is an indicator of quality. The Godfather IS good. I THINK Van Helsing is good. But i'd never say Van Helsing IS good, because it is not.

Just because some people may not like the Godfather personally does not change the quality of the direction, acting or writing. It's like making food, you can make the best pizza in the world, but that doesn't help anyone who just plain doesn't like pizza. I like eating McDonalds, but it is crap food.

 

[turtlefocker]

My logic is flawed?

"Good" is not an opinion. "I think this is good" is an opinion. "Good" is an indicator of quality. The Godfather IS good. I THINK Van Helsing is good. But i'd never say Van Helsing IS good, because it is not.

Just because some people may not like the Godfather personally does not change the quality of the direction, acting or writing. It's like making food, you can make the best pizza in the world, but that doesn't help anyone who just plain doesn't like pizza. I like eating McDonalds, but it is crap food.

zing

 

[livrule]

My logic is flawed?

"Good" is not an opinion. "I think this is good" is an opinion. "Good" is an indicator of quality. The Godfather IS good. I THINK Van Helsing is good. But i'd never say Van Helsing IS good, because it is not.

Just because some people may not like the Godfather personally does not change the quality of the direction, acting or writing. It's like making food, you can make the best pizza in the world, but that doesn't help anyone who just plain doesn't like pizza. I like eating McDonalds, but it is crap food.

Amen .... you type what I think.

 

[Warhammer]

Raging Bull is an example of a near perfect piece. From acting, direction, to the life-story and the well choreographed ring fight scenes. Unlike the boring Gone With the Wind and Titanic, I could watch Raging Bull all of the time, it's a movie I never get tired of it. It's entertaining and informative.

Raging Bull is one of my favorite films, ever.

My logic is flawed?

"Good" is not an opinion. "I think this is good" is an opinion. "Good" is an indicator of quality.

Good is an opinion, just like bad is.

The Godfather IS good. I THINK Van Helsing is good. But i'd never say Van Helsing IS good, because it is not.

Just because some people may not like the Godfather personally does not change the quality of the direction, acting or writing.

They're still opinions.
I think The Godfather is one of the greatest films ever made. However, they doesn't mean that Joe down the street thinks so. This is the Hype. You wouldn't have to look for one minute to see what I mean, regarding films.

It's like making food, you can make the best pizza in the world, but that doesn't help anyone who just plain doesn't like pizza. I like eating McDonalds, but it is crap food.

You explained what I thought right there with the pizza.
You can make the best pizza in the world, but it doesn't help anyone who just hates pizza, just like you can make a high quality film as The Godfather, but it wouldn't help people who don't seem to dig those kinds of films. They should, but what makes us human is difference in opinion. Hell, I'll even use this example. It's like vegetables. They are extremely beneficial to you, but if you don't like cauliflower, you don't like cauliflower. Even if it is extremely good for you. I fail to see the relevance to the McDonald's example, though.

I don't really want to continue this argument, though.
I am not going to change my mind about personal preference.

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

I saw this thread had 4 pages, so I thought ‘meh, what the heck’ and read them all through.
Obviously I agree with the whole ‘personal preference’ factor to be a major one but I believe I can also see where Jimothy is coming from. He just needs to get his definitions straight. It’s an ‘individual VS herd’ issue.
You may not like some movie but if the majority of Earth’s film viewing population finds it good there must be some truth to its quality. Unless of course that majority is brainwashed - groups are far easier to entertain than separate individuals. Some people here said it themselves - you can recognize quality in a film and enjoy it but that won’t necessarily mean it meats the criteria of what you would consider to be one of your favorites - your ‘personal preference’. Does that make a film less ‘good’?
Not trying to change anyone’s opinion. Just attempted to clarify different views for everybody, especially to myself.
No?

Also, throughout the thread I read people saying that the characters have to be ‘relatable’.
I might be mistaking the definition of ‘relatable’ with something else but I’m gonna go against the major consensus here and say:
What about all the bad guys and villains in movies? All the murderers and psychos? What about the characters we love to hate?
I don’t think it is necessary for personages to be likable and be able to ‘walk in their shoes’ to enjoy them.
The film Bully is a good example - I couldn’t stand any of the characters. I thought they were morons and down right insane. Despite that I still managed to comprehend their actions and follow them through. Based on that one aspect alone it turned to be a pretty enjoyable movie.

 

[DorkyFresh]

You may not like some movie but if the majority of Earth’s film viewing population finds it good there must be some truth to its quality. Unless of course that majority is brainwashed - groups are far easier to entertain than separate individuals. Some people here said it themselves - you can recognize quality in a film and enjoy it but that won’t necessarily mean it meats the criteria of what you would consider to be one of your favorites - your ‘personal preference’. Does that make a film less ‘good’?

a praise-worthy post. kudos for realizing that personal preference plays a limited role.

 

[Erzengel]

I would rather use the word consensus than herd though.

 

[Warhammer]

a praise-worthy post. kudos for realizing that personal preference plays a limited role.

No, personal preference IS the role. Without personal preference, you can't form an opinion. It just so happens that for a film like The Godfather, many of the people (like I) actually realize the greatness and quality of that film. However, we (as a group) find the film a masterpiece. That does not mean that everybody on the face of this planet think the same way, as well as The Godfather automatically being "good," which is ONLY a opinion or point of view. What many in here are failing to realize about my posts is that I am speaking for the individual, and the individual only. A group/consensus/herd is many individuals. Without the individual, there is no group. Without one individual in existence, there can not be a group.

I hope that some posters finally realize what I am trying to say.

 

[Alf]

Dont think about the individual person, think about the individual film.

 

[DorkyFresh]

No, personal preference IS the role. Without personal preference, you can't form an opinion.

personal preference plays a personal role. it operates on an individual level. personal preference doesn't apply to the masses. one group of people can't have 1 personal preference. if a group agrees on something, it's no longer a personal preference...it's a consensus. when a consensus forms, that as far as personal preference goes. that's when a movie that's good to one person becomes good to several people. if it's good to several people then it's no longer just a "personal preference" since it's more than one person that shares that preference.

It just so happens that for a film like The Godfather, many of the people (like I) actually realize the greatness and quality of that film. However, we (as a group) find the film a masterpiece. That does not mean that everybody on the face of this planet think the same way, as well as The Godfather automatically being "good," which is ONLY a opinion or point of view.

not every person on the planet thinks killing innocent people is a bad thing...so are you going to tell me that it's just their "personal preference"? the majority of the people on the planet realize that killing innocent people is a bad thing...those few people who think it's okay obviously have a problem. just like those people who like Uwe Boll's movies have problems. even though Uwe Boll fans have a personal preference on what movies are good and bad...that doesn't mean their personal preference consists of good movies, the same way people who think it's okay to kill innocent people don't have a personal preference that consists of good morals.

What many in here are failing to realize about my posts is that I am speaking for the individual, and the individual only. A group/consensus/herd is many individuals. Without the individual, there is no group. Without one individual in existence, there can not be a group.

I hope that some posters finally realize what I am trying to say.

we've already established that what a person thinks is a good movie is solely personal preference. if all you're talking about is personal preference when it comes to an INDIVIDUAL then that's where your point ends....along with personal preference. as i said, personal preference may be the foundation for what makes a film "good" or "bad" but it plays a limited role because it only applies to the individual....and not the masses.

 

[Warhammer]

personal preference plays a personal role. it operates on an individual level. personal preference doesn't apply to the masses. one group of people can't have 1 personal preference. if a group agrees on something, it's no longer a personal preference...it's a consensus. when a consensus forms, that as far as personal preference goes. that's when a movie that's good to one person becomes good to several people. if it's good to several people then it's no longer just a "personal preference" since it's more than one person that shares that preference.

An opinion is personal.

It just so happens that everyone that like The Godfather share the same opinion, or preference. When it all comes down to it, the only person that decides whether they like a film is themselves. I don't care what anybody said, I thought The Godfather was an amazing film because of my opinion. Not because of it being slapped with the "good" film consensus or being universally hailed. With that said, I don't care what the consensus thinks, only you decide whether a film is good or not, nobody else. The consensus all share the same common opinion. Individually, they all thought that The Godfather was a good film. Or are you telling me that some of the consensus is made up of blindly loyal people/people who can't form their own opinion?

not every person on the planet thinks killing innocent people is a bad thing...so are you going to tell me that it's just their "personal preference"? the majority of the people on the planet realize that killing innocent people is a bad thing...those few people who think it's okay obviously have a problem.

This is a film, not a human life. That's a very drastic example. However, you took it there, so I'll continue it. To be blunt, yeah. Killing being "good" or "bad" is a preference. "Good" and "bad" is an opinion. If not, why did some serial killers continue to kill. Obviously, some thought it wasn't wrong, or else, what was their point in doing so?

What about the United States nuking Nagasaki and Hiroshima at the climax of WWII? Many, many innocent people died because of that, but the president (and many others) thought that it was necessary. The positive side of that was that it was all a means to an end. Because of that, Japan surrendered and the Allies won WWII. Some may agree, and some may disagree with that statement. Why? Because we have opinions. What about wars that the United States was involved in. Were we the bad guys? Maybe because we're American, we may think that we weren't, but to the opposing force, we very much were the bad guys. Why? Because we have opinions.

And again, "good" is an opinion. There is nothing set in stone that states that something is "good" or "bad." We choose what we think is "good" and "bad".

just like those people who like Uwe Boll's movies have problems. even though Uwe Boll fans have a personal preference on what movies are good and bad...that doesn't mean their personal preference consists of good movies, the same way people who think it's okay to kill innocent people don't have a personal preference that consists of good morals.

That sounds very film-snobbish/immature to me. People who like Uwe Boll films don't have problems. They think it is good, so more power to them. They have every right to have an opinion. They like Uwe Boll films, you don't. Who cares? Perhaps, you love pizza. If your neighbor thinks pizza is a very nasty food, do they have a problem?

we've already established that what a person thinks is a good movie is solely personal preference. if all you're talking about is personal preference when it comes to an INDIVIDUAL then that's where your point ends....along with personal preference. as i said, personal preference may be the foundation for what makes a film "good" or "bad" but it plays a limited role because it only applies to the individual....and not the masses.

Not to sound like a broken record, but it takes many individuals to make a masses. Without a personal preference, there is no consensus. A consensus is a majority of opinion. That majority is many people who shared a common opinion. That opinion is and was originally a personal preference. All of that leads to a personal opinion of "good" or "bad" film.

Looking back at the first page, I find it funny. All of this ultimately lead to the thread starters question. GhostPoet asked a question, and I answered HIM. It was other posters that made this thread into a consensus type of thread, when GhostPoet was asking a question solely for himself. I answer that question for him, as an individual, because that's the answer that he was looking for. With that said, I am sticking to my opinion because I think that it is a "good" opinion. Call it what you want.

 

[Trevor Goodchild]

This reminds me of that story about the wisemen arguing over where’s the top and bottom of a stick.

Either it’s the peak or its foundations; we are still talking about the same damn pyramid here.
What makes a movie good - personal preference.
What gives a movie quality value (‘goodness&#8217 - positive consensus.
Therefore I agree with both opinions. Both are true and both are valid, only the points of perspective differ.

 

[DorkyFresh]

Not to sound like a broken record, but it takes many individuals to make a masses. Without a personal preference, there is no consensus. A consensus is a majority of opinion. That majority is many people who shared a common opinion. That opinion is and was originally a personal preference. All of that leads to a personal opinion of "good" or "bad" film.

i totally agree with all of that...you'll never find me posting anything contradictory. i even said that personal preference is the foundation for what determines what is ultimately considered a good movie...but not to sound like a broken record, it plays a LIMITED role in the grand scheme of things.

Looking back at the first page, I find it funny. All of this ultimately lead to the thread starters question. GhostPoet asked a question, and I answered HIM. It was other posters that made this thread into a consensus type of thread, when GhostPoet was asking a question solely for himself.

maybe you should reread the original post then. Ghost doesn't mention anything about HIMSELF or HIM as an individual. of course he's asking for his own reasons but he gave no indication about giving answers based on a personal level. he left it open and vague...meaning it's open to more than just individualism. he even went so far as to say "On a more general side of things..." and "general" basically means grouped or categorized....not meaning "individual".

I answer that question for him, as an individual, because that's the answer that he was looking for.

oh really? well...i guess you missed his own answer then. here it is...

wow...I come back and this thread is up to 3 pages already.

anyway, I agree that personal preference is a big factor. But I also agree that it can come down to quality...you can tell when a director puts his all into a movie or if he's doing it to meet a deadline.

the Resident Evil series isn't the deepest movie experience...but I really like it a lot. The story isn't complex and the characters are not mind-blowingly deep...but I DO like the movies for what they are...mindless action with a touch of horror.

So, I think even a movie that isn't pure quality can still be a "good" movie...sometimes just because it can be fun to watch something that doesn't require a lot of thought...I guess that could fit into "mood".

his answer wasn't confined to individualism or personal preference and he said it is a BIG factor (which i agree) but he didn't say it was THE DEFINITIVE answer to what makes a good movie. you gonna say he's wrong?

Hard question, but the only right answer is personal preference.

oh...woops. you already did...but wait a minute. weren't you just saying that there's no such thing as wrong or right when it comes to opinions?

Flawed logic.

you know...for someone who claims that there's no difinitive "good" or "bad" you sure do like telling people that they're wrong.

 

[DorkyFresh]

This reminds me of that story about the wisemen arguing over where’s the top and bottom of a stick.

lol...i don't know why. i'm more of a wise guy than i am a wise man...hehe

What makes a movie good - personal preference.
What gives a movie quality value (‘goodness&#8217 - positive consensus.
Therefore I agree with both opinions. Both are true and both are valid, only the points of perspective differ.

actually they don't...i fully agree with personal preference but i also acknowledge that it's not the full or only answer to the question. my opinion is that a good movie is determined, generally, by majority opinion and, within that majority, individuals determine a good movie by personal preference.

 

[Warhammer]

i totally agree with all of that...you'll never find me posting anything contradictory. i even said that personal preference is the foundation for what determines what is ultimately considered a good movie...but not to sound like a broken record, it plays a LIMITED role in the grand scheme of things.

The only thing that we disagree on is that I think it plays the VITAL role, not a LIMITED role. If something is a foundation of something, then it is something vital, not limited.

maybe you should reread the original post then. Ghost doesn't mention anything about HIMSELF or HIM as an individual. of course he's asking for his own reasons but he gave no indication about giving answers based on a personal level. he left it open and vague...meaning it's open to more than just individualism. he even went so far as to say "On a more general side of things..." and "general" basically means grouped or categorized....not meaning "individual".

He edited his post.
My post was directly to his original post, not the edited post with the added paragraph. He sure wasn't general about the original.

oh really? well...i guess you missed his own answer then. here it is...

Quality is an opinion, though. If all of us (general movie-goers, fanboys, critics, etc.) agreed with the quality of films, then we wouldn't even have this debate, now would we? I'm not going to put on a face and say something like this:

"Well, Pulp Fiction is my favorite film, but I just know that Lawrence of Arabia is a better film because of it's quality. Pulp Fiction isn't as good a movie as that, but it is still my favorite."

No, I'm not going to sugar-code something like that. I like and enjoy Pulp Fiction. I think Pulp Fiction is a better film than Lawrence of Arabia is, and that's that. Both were amazing, but I'll stick to my opinion. This is why we all have different tastes in films. I'm not going to be blindly loyal and just call every film on the AFI Top 100 the best films of all-time for the sake of them being up there.

his answer wasn't confined to individualism or personal preference and he said it is a BIG factor (which i agree) but he didn't say it was THE DEFINITIVE answer to what makes a good movie. you gonna say he's wrong?

This is going to be like talking to a brick wall, because I still think that in order to have a consensus, there must be a personal opinion. Like I said, I don't care how critically hailed/acclaimed The Godfather was, I loved the film because I thought it was good. Not because I went along with the opinion out there, or was ashamed to go against it. What if somebody seriously dislikes a film like Casino Royale. Do they have a problem because they didn't like the film? Because they disagreed with the majority of the critics/consensus? Do you really think that they are going to say "I hated the film, but I'm still going to admit that it was a good film?" That's an oxymoron right there, and you won't see me use it. If I don't like a film, I don't like it. And that's it.

oh...woops. you already did...but wait a minute. weren't you just saying that there's no such thing as wrong or right when it comes to opinions?

I was replying to his original post. And it was my opinion, and I thought that it was right. Yet, I never said something like "anybody who disagrees with this is damn fool." You might as well go ahead and quote anybody in this entire forum who said "(So and so) was a good movie."

you know...for someone who claims that there's no difinitive "good" or "bad" you sure do like telling people that they're wrong.

Because he said some asinine stuff like this in that post:

It doesn't work that way.

Those films are good films whether some people like it or not. They are universally liked, for several reasons. The direction, acting and other factors are inherently good, and some guy not liking those movies doesn't change that.

I didn't care for Blade Runner, but I understand that its a good film.

Who is he to say that? "Those films" are good films to people who think/understand that they are good films. If Joe down the street doesn't like it, more power to him. He has a different opinion, so we have to get over it and accept it. "Some guy not liking those movies doesn't change that" is a personal statement. To you, it doesn't change anything, but to him, he doesn't like it. So be it.

Then he supplied the oxymoron at the end. Perhaps he thinks this way, but I don't. For example, I liked The Phantom, but not everybody out there liked it. We all have films that we like that some of the critics never liked. The Phantom has never reached the acclaim of The Godfather. DorkyFresh, is The Phantom a good film? I guess not, right? Because the majority of critics originally didn't like it, and the film doesn't have The Godfather or Star Wars kind of critical acclaim? I liked it, but I guess my opinion on a film that I liked holds no merit to me, eh? I bet you are wondering I asked you something like that, huh? Since you wanted to go back in time and pull up my past posts, I'll put up one of yours:

very well said...


....personal preference plays a big role on wether or not a film is good, but personal preference can only go so far. some films are good regardless of personal preference.

You said this right after Jimothy's post. Is what I bolded true?
I mean really. Even films that I like must be pieces of crap, because the big bad critics/consensus doesn't like it like I do, right?

DorkyFresh, you and I could go on all day and night about this...
How about we just bury the hatchet now?

 

[DorkyFresh]

cool with me...i'm over it.

 

[terry78]

It all depends on what you like, is the consensus. Fantastic Four was liked by a lot of people for example, but we still say that the box office doesn't make a good movie, and that they were basically brainwashed by the marketing to go see it. I think that's a copout, as you can't have it both ways and say another movie that you feel is good that got great profit proves that it's good. There are horrible movies out there that people love, more than just a few people. And they view it as the greatest since sliced bread. They're not wrong, and I ain't wrong. It just depends on what you like.