Shutter Island

Originally posted by dadudemon

Indeed. We should discuss away. However, we shouldn't tell others what their opinions should and shouldn't be.

The prevailing train of thought seems to be more like "You can voice your opinion but only so long as it agrees with mine" otherwise it's deemed as shoving your opinion that noone cares about on others.

I'd challenge anyone to go on to SnakeEyes profile and argue that his list of favourite films is evidence of bad taste. I only disagreed with a handful of them (mostly geared around comedy with the occasional other genre)

Even the ones I don't agree with are still far better GI Joe.

Then there's the fact that Martin Scorcese could film himself taking a dump and it'd still be far superior to anything Stephen Sommers has done...His only redeeming film being Deep Rising for sheer absurd entertainment (Woman being pulled down the toilet...half digested man).

He has Toy Story and Iron Giant listed.

He obviously has taste.

Originally posted by NemeBro
He has Toy Story and Iron Giant listed.

He obviously has taste.

Toy Story is regarded is one of the best modern animated movies and paved the way for the entire modern method and style of computer generated animation. A 100% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 92 on metacritic is testament to it.

A 97% and and 85% rating for Iron Giant on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic show how it is regarded.

Oddly enough...What did GI Joe get? (seeing as it's being used in this thread)...36% on Rotten Tomatoes and 32% on Metacritic....Nice.

Even Shutter Island is getting in the 60s

I'd also say the fact that he mentions the Shining, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Raging Bull, Blade Runner, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Full Metal Jacket, Reservoir Dogs, The Deer Hunter and many of the other films that are considered among the best ever made make a strong case for him having better taste than most of the people who've chimed in in this thread so far.

Does Patricia Clarkson have a big role in this? or is she the woman

Spoiler:
Dicaprio's character sees hiding out in the island

No. The spoiler is correct.

I liked it. The ending was so-so. Made me angry at first, but as they fleshed it out I came to terms with it.

Originally posted by jaden101
Toy Story is regarded is one of the best modern animated movies and paved the way for the entire modern method and style of computer generated animation. A 100% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 92 on metacritic is testament to it.

A 97% and and 85% rating for Iron Giant on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic show how it is regarded.

Oddly enough...What did GI Joe get? (seeing as it's being used in this thread)...36% on Rotten Tomatoes and 32% on Metacritic....Nice.

Even Shutter Island is getting in the 60s

I'd also say the fact that he mentions the Shining, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Raging Bull, Blade Runner, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Full Metal Jacket, Reservoir Dogs, The Deer Hunter and many of the other films that are considered among the best ever made make a strong case for him having better taste than most of the people who've chimed in in this thread so far.

Thanks for the support, man. It warms my heart and it saved me some typing-time!

As for the movie, I'm thinking about seeing it again. Anyone else get a chance to see it?

Just got back from seeing this. Unfortunately I had the movie spoiled to me thanks to a jerk on youtube but I still found it to be quite enjoyable. I'd give it a 9/10

And on a side note, I've never been more disturbed while watching a movie. Some parts were brutal.... like damnn.

I really liked this film. The visuals and soundtrack were great, as was the acting. You could predict the ending for the most part, but it was still cool seeing the way things developed. The final scene though was really a jaw dropper though IMO. That scene was just so powerful.

I liked it, but it's probably going to be one of those polarizing films, where you either buy it or you don't. Scorsese could have tighted up the editing on those long dream sequences, too. I was feeling impatient with the movie's pace at times.

Originally posted by jaden101
The prevailing train of thought seems to be more like "You can voice your opinion but only so long as it agrees with mine" otherwise it's deemed as shoving your opinion that noone cares about on others.

I'd challenge anyone to go on to SnakeEyes profile and argue that his list of favourite films is evidence of bad taste. I only disagreed with a handful of them (mostly geared around comedy with the occasional other genre)

Even the ones I don't agree with are still far better GI Joe.

Then there's the fact that Martin Scorcese could film himself taking a dump and it'd still be far superior to anything Stephen Sommers has done...His only redeeming film being Deep Rising for sheer absurd entertainment (Woman being pulled down the toilet...half digested man).

He posted this:

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Yeah. Bruce is wrong.

That's pretty retarded.

And what you call good taste is simply you agreeing with him, not an objective measure of good taste. argumentum ad populum?

No taste is wrong or right.

With that said, Bruce likes Twilight, New Moon and G.I. Joe. Many people on this forum consider him to be a paragon of bad taste (Even if that's just opinion).

I'm definitely going to side with almost anyone's opinion over someone who likes those movies. I find it odd, Dudemon, reall. For someone so critical of filmmaking sins you sure do like some trash. That's MY opinion, though, and that's what SnakeEyes was saying. Maybe Bruce is someone you should be listening to.

-AC

Originally posted by dadudemon
He posted this:

That's pretty retarded.

And what you call good taste is simply you agreeing with him, not an objective measure of good taste. argumentum ad populum?

Seems my opinion of the situation is in the minority so how that can be argumentum ad populum is beyond me.

Of course, you're likely referring to the prevailing opinion that the films in SE's list are considered better than GI Joe...Consider that argumentum ad populum if you like but it isn't a logical fallacy because it's subjective. It's a matter of taste, as you say.

You can, however, put some degree of objectivity into it by having different sources grade the film and get a meta-analysis of it (as metacritic and rotten tomatoes do).

Of course, if you want to argue that the scores in which they are based are skewed by argumentum ad populum then be my guest but the onus would be on you to back up that claim which would be nigh on impossible to do anyway.

I took the Pepsi-challenge, Snakeeyes has a solid taste in movies, I agree with 90% of them. Disregarding the ones I haven't watched.

Bruce didn't really have a list, but GI Joe and Twilight blow. Think we're on the opposite ends of the movie spectrum.

Originally posted by BackFire
The movie is worth seeing. Even if the ending isn't great or all that creative. The rest is pretty sound and interesting.

Ah good. If I happen to know the twist (read it long ago), will that turn the movie into shit for me?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No taste is wrong or right.

With that said, Bruce likes Twilight, New Moon and G.I. Joe. Many people on this forum consider him to be a paragon of bad taste (Even if that's just opinion).

Cool. I know that, but he also likes some of the same films that everyone, including critics, likes. To me, it's the ups and downs of why there are differences of opinion.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm definitely going to side with almost anyone's opinion over someone who likes those movies. I find it odd, Dudemon, reall. For someone so critical of filmmaking sins you sure do like some trash.

Which ones are trash? You saw that massive list I posted, right?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's MY opinion, though, and that's what SnakeEyes was saying. Maybe Bruce is someone you should be listening to.

-AC

And, I respect your opinion. Your opinions are usually much more "well thought-out" compared to others. If you just posted, "It was shit acting", when you criticized a movie, I'd think you were an idiot, unless you explained yourself.

Bruce hasn't steered me wrong, yet. What he says are good, I always right higher than average. What he says are shit or have problems, I agree with those points and have similar problems. Stands to reason that I would go to Bruce for advice on movies I'm not sure about, right?

plan on seeing it sometime this week.Looking forward to it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Cool. I know that, but he also likes some of the same films that everyone, including critics, likes. To me, it's the ups and downs of why there are differences of opinion.

Which ones are trash? You saw that massive list I posted, right?

And, I respect your opinion. Your opinions are usually much more "well thought-out" compared to others. If you just posted, "It was shit acting", when you criticized a movie, I'd think you were an idiot, unless you explained yourself.

Bruce hasn't steered me wrong, yet. What he says are good, I always right higher than average. What he says are shit or have problems, I agree with those points and have similar problems. Stands to reason that I would go to Bruce for advice on movies I'm not sure about, right?

New Moon was higher than average?

-AC

Originally posted by jaden101
Seems my opinion of the situation is in the minority so how that can be argumentum ad populum is beyond me.

It is not. Most the people here say the same of Bruce. I don't understand the hate...especially when I agree with him most of the time. 😆

Originally posted by jaden101
Of course, you're likely referring to the prevailing opinion that the films in SE's list are considered better than GI Joe...Consider that argumentum ad populum if you like but it isn't a logical fallacy because it's subjective. It's a matter of taste, as you say.

Indeed. Appealing to the masses, whether on a message board community, or the entire world, that's argumentum ad populum. In this scenario, we had an appeal to the KMC community's general consensus.

Originally posted by jaden101
You can, however, put some degree of objectivity into it by having different sources grade the film and get a meta-analysis of it (as metacritic and rotten tomatoes do).

That's just an even bigger "argumentum ad populum" measure. It's all very much subjective.

People go to critics or sources they trust. They trust the potential logical fallacy being committed as an acceptable probability, even if subconsciously. Meaning, they believe that the critics or sources they go to for information on the film will generally agree with their opinion. But, here's the kicker: is it possible that the person will like the film more because of the "preliminary" influence of that trusted source? I am a heavy believer in that last part, there. I think that the hate of the prequel trilogy is a victim of that: some star wars fanboy started whining about things, others caught on, and the idea spread in a very "memish" fashion. I don't believe that there are very many truly, 100% pure haters of the PT: it's a fad from star wars fanboys.

The only objective way to go about it is sales: regardless of what anyone says, if it sells, more will be made like it. Sales and "doing" are measured by the success with the target audience. If it succeeds there, it is very much objective. It's a 0 or 1 thing: fail or succeed. Anything above and beyond that is just just bonus. 😄

Originally posted by jaden101
Of course, if you want to argue that the scores in which they are based are skewed by argumentum ad populum then be my guest but the onus would be on you to back up that claim which would be nigh on impossible to do anyway.

lol

It just so happens that I made that same exact point, above. It is impossible as the subconscious is almost impossible to measure. It can be indirectly observed in some psychological studies, and we do know that humans are extremely social: logically, we can say that at he very very least, SOME are affected by reviews they read from sources they trust. The extent of that, however, is the item in question.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
New Moon was higher than average?

-AC

Haven't seen it.

Also, I don't think BruceS. said New Moon was awesome. In fact, didn't he say it was better than he expected? (Meaning, he probably went into the film with low expectations.)

It is not. Most the people here say the same of Bruce. I don't understand the hate...especially when I agree with him most of the time.

I was referring to the idea that SE was somehow shoving his opinion down people's throats simply because his opinion differed from theirs.

Indeed. Appealing to the masses, whether on a message board community, or the entire world, that's argumentum ad populum. In this scenario, we had an appeal to the KMC community's general consensus.

If the consensus agrees with me...The consensus is right. This is the law.

People go to critics or sources they trust. They trust the potential logical fallacy being committed as an acceptable probability, even if subconsciously. Meaning, they believe that the critics or sources they go to for information on the film will generally agree with their opinion. But, here's the kicker: is it possible that the person will like the film more because of the "preliminary" influence of that trusted source? I am a heavy believer in that last part, there. I think that the hate of the prequel trilogy is a victim of that: some star wars fanboy started whining about things, others caught on, and the idea spread in a very "memish" fashion. I don't believe that there are very many truly, 100% pure haters of the PT: it's a fad from star wars fanboys.

I don't trust Mark Kermode. I hate the man with an absolute passion. I generally hate film critics on the whole because they're stuck up (unts but I more often than not agree with him.

I do agree with the last part in many cases though. I think a lot of people go into films wanted to and thus forcing themselves to like certain films. I also believe it's the same with films that the general consensus hate. It's good to go against the grain (not for the sake of it but for honesty)

The general consensus is the the Lord of the Rings trilogy is the best thing since sliced bread. I think it's shit. Mostly because I can't stand the fantasy genre and I also think some tecnhnical aspects of the film are terrible (as well as the acting).

I don't like the Godfather movies...Never have. I find them boring and irrelevant. I think they are about as true to the source inspiration as old black and white movies about WW2 when everyone says things like "Well gee whiz captain...The Japs are coming over them there hills. We better do something right quick"

As much as I wanted to like The Road because I love the book...I didn't...It was poor. The cinematography was glorious but the rest of it was dire beyond belief.

The only objective way to go about it is sales: regardless of what anyone says, if it sells, more will be made like it. Sales and "doing" are measured by the success with the target audience. If it succeeds there, it is very much objective. It's a 0 or 1 thing: fail or succeed. Anything above and beyond that is just just bonus.

Hardly an objective measure of whether something is good or not though is it. You can entice millions of people to go see a movie with a good trailer for a film that most of the people end up hating. Or then there's the hype aspect. Most people hated The Blair Witch Project...They still went to see it because of the hype and so count towards the box office total.

It just so happens that I made that same exact point, above. It is impossible as the subconscious is almost impossible to measure. It can be indirectly observed in some psychological studies, and we do know that humans are extremely social: logically, we can say that at he very very least, SOME are affected by reviews they read from sources they trust. The extent of that, however, is the item in question.

Indeed.

I think the best examples on KMC recently of how opinions of films can be affected is when you go into the threads for films like Gamer and Legion...Most people said the trailers look(ed) good. They then go on to say the film was shit (or in the case of Legion my money is on the same people who thought the trailer looked good coming back after seeing the movie and saying it's shit)

So with that in mind...Valhalla Rising...Avoid like an STD.