What I don't get...

[Animeniax]

I see a lot of movies that are well made with a good storyline, good character development, and good cinematography with a powerful and moving message. But due to the nature of the subject matter, the story and characters are frustratingly obnoxious, everyone dies, and nothing good comes of it. Is it wrong to say it's a terrible movie?

[shinta|hikari]

Yes. You say you hated the movie in that case.

[Animeniax]

Yes. You say you hated the movie in that case.

Is that because all movies should be tidy and final and have happy endings?

[shinta|hikari]

Er, no?

I said that the description of movies that you provided is not necessarily a bad movie. If you (as in you as a person specifically) dislike it, you should just say that you hate it, not that it was a bad movie.

I personally really like tragedies when they are executed well.

[Sapphire]

Good movies should be movies you like and bad movies should be movies you don't like. Movies are designed for you to like them. Well made movies... that's a different story.

[shinta|hikari]

Good = Well made

I don't see how they differ.

Movies are designed for most people to like them, and that does not make them right either.

I like/dislike vs Good/Well made is a lot clearer.

Like/Dislike is clearly preference, while Good/Bad or Well made/Not well made is a judgment based on an external standard. Of course, all of this is opinion in the end.

[Sapphire]

Avatar - Extremely well made, not the best movie.

[shinta|hikari]

Are you referring to strictly production values when you say well made?

I think good/well made includes the script, characters, acting, and well, everything that makes up the movie.

[Sapphire]

All of the above can be well executed and still come out to be something that's not very likable.

[darkshadow]

Good/Bad are too universally accepted, a good movie is a movie that is actually universally seen as good; same with bad, even if you (the minority) disagrees with it. If you personally didn't like it, you need to think if it was just because the production (sfx,plot,acting) was genuinly bad or if you simply didn't like it for some other personal reason. In that case say you think or feel it was bad/horrible.

In the end movies are too subjective, so even a stupid B movie can be enjoyable in the end; "it was so bad it was good ;D", universally bad movie, subjectively good opinion.

[shinta|hikari]

Exactly. "Likable" itself is very subjective. A person can dislike the Mona Lisa even if it is such a well known painting, widely accepted as one of the best.

If all the elements are well executed, it is a good movie. If you don't like it, that is your preference.

[Sapphire]

If someone hates the the Mona Lisa and thinks its a pile of crap, even though everyone else seems to think it's the best painting ever made, that person shouldn't have to agree with everyone else and call it "good". To them, it's "bad".

People tend to say, "it's good, I just don't like it" and it's almost always to keep other people from getting pissed off at them or offended. If that person wasn't worried about everyone else, they'd prolly say "I hate that shit, it sucks." (It's bad)

[shinta|hikari]

I'm not saying that the minority has to agree with the majority. The majority is stupid most of the time anyway.

I'm just saying that using the word "good" without any qualifiers (i.e. good for me) when expressing pure preference is not a good idea. It is better to distinguish between personal opinion and what is accepted by society. I am not saying either is correct or better, just that the distinction has to be made.

[Animeniax]

The movie that raised this question is The Stoning of Soraya M., which is about Middle Eastern culture and the accepted punishment for adultery. Looking at it objectively, you would say the storyline was solid, the characters are developed, and the message is moving and heart-wrenching.

But looking at it subjectively through the eyes of an American, it was impossible to fully understand the cultural mores and underlying contexts that governed the action in the plot and the behavior of the characters. So instead of feeling sympathy for them, I only felt anger and disgust as they went headfirst into their fates. With that disgust, I could only walk away from the movie feeling terrible. So if anyone asked me what I thought of the movie, I'd have to say I hated it. Is that a fair assessment of the movie?

[shinta|hikari]

I would say it's fair. Hating something does not make it bad. I dislike some shows that I consider good and excellently made, too.

[Buffalobiian]

Sapphi, would you say your way of rating things apply to food as well?

[Sapphire]

Most definitely.

[Buffalobiian]

So no matter how well made something is, as long as you don't like it you won't call it good or well made at all? That it's just shit because you don't like it?

I can recognise a good dish, even if it contains fake-seafood-stick-red/white stuff that I find disgusting and won't touch again.

[Sapphire]

I'll call something well made for what it is, but tastes bad is bad to me.

[Edort4]

I prefer honest and simple opinions about movies and so. Art is filled with some premade standards that a bunch of guys came together with and decided what could be called good or bad in terms of creation/production.

I hate that people that start explaining about characters, plot, acting, sfx, ost etc. Most of the times just to match if they liked the movie or not. Subjective opinions disguised as arguments. Sometimes "bad" movies give me good times and "good" ones bore me to dead. So not trying to fool myself or anyone if what I watched felt good its good for me.