Jump to content


Photo

The 100 Nitpicks


  • Please log in to reply
146 replies to this topic

#1 Phatt XIV

Phatt XIV

    La Saraghina

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

Posted 24 February 2009 - 10:15 AM

All comments regarding The 100 Blows go here.

#2 Phatt XIV

Phatt XIV

    La Saraghina

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

Posted 24 February 2009 - 01:15 PM

but I've always liked Jackson's King Kong more than LOTR for some reason.


Fellowship is Jackson's crowning achievement, and I always thought it blew King Kong out of the water. The actors and actresses in Jackson's King Kong always ruined it for me.

#3 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 28 February 2009 - 06:36 PM

^
You should try some Fellini! :lol:

#4 diceman89

diceman89

    The Man Behind You

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 111 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nowhere, MS

Posted 03 March 2009 - 02:25 PM

Got it down to 101, and just couldn't go any further.

1. 12 Angry Men (1957)
2. 1900 (1976)
3. Ace in the Hole (1951)
4. etc...

^
You should try some Fellini! :lol:


I have watched a lot of Fellini. His movies are good. I originally had Amarcord on the list, but it was one of the last I bumped off. It's probably like number 104 or something.

#5 masterofoneinchpunch

masterofoneinchpunch

    The Artful Dodger

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,371 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Modesto, CA
  • Interests:NBA, MMA, Movies, Setting fires.

Posted 03 March 2009 - 02:37 PM

I have watched a lot of Fellini. His movies are good. I originally had Amarcord on the list, but it was one of the last I bumped off. It's probably like number 104 or something.


Maybe replace Kramer vs. Kramer with 8˝ or Nights of Cabiria. :lol:
Under Construction:
My Criterion Collection (408; I Own and Have Watched):
1-16, 18, 19, 20, 21(2nd), 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51(1st & 2nd), 52, 52, 53, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86. 87, 88, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 105, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 121, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151(1st), 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 164, 165, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 180, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 201, 202, 204, 205, 206, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 224, 226, 227, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 237, 239, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 260, 263, 266, 267, 268, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 297, 298, 300(2D), 301, 302, 304, 305, 306, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 335, 336, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 351, 352, 353, 354, 357, 358, 359, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 378, 379, 380, 383, 385, 386, 387, 388, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 402, 404, 405, 408, 409, 410, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 424, 425, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 437, 439, 441, 445, 446, 447, 448, 451, 453, 455, 456, 457, 459, 460, 461, 462, 465, 470, 475, 476, 478, 481, 482, 487, 490, 497, 498, 499, 500, 501, 503, 505, 512, 524, 525, 526, 528, 529, 530, 531, 539, 540, 543, 556, 565, 572, 578, 579, 580, 586, 596, 650, 664, 677

Previous Editions: 2,
Eclipse: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 23, 26, 33

“Empty your bladder of that bitter black urine you call coffee.” – The Tick

My HK movie reviews
My Amazon Reviews

#6 diceman89

diceman89

    The Man Behind You

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 111 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nowhere, MS

Posted 03 March 2009 - 04:38 PM

Maybe replace Kramer vs. Kramer with 8˝ or Nights of Cabiria. :lol:



8 1/2 wasn't very far behind Amarcord. I also considered Satyricon and La Dolce Vita.

#7 Opale

Opale

    Adante con molto

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec city

Posted 04 March 2009 - 03:51 AM

^
So your list is definitely a personal appreciation list more than a quality one...?

#8 Phatt XIV

Phatt XIV

    La Saraghina

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

Posted 04 March 2009 - 07:11 AM

^
So your list is definitely a personal appreciation list more than a quality one...?


That's if you consider the two to be distinguishable. I think it is a bit unfair to say that movies that are personally close to you are not up to par quality wise with other "quality" films. Citizen Kane is a film that is considered to be a "quality film" that I, and many others, consider to be more of a technical achievement rather than an entertaining movie, and it would therefore never be put into my 100 favorite films list.

However, Kramer v. Kramer is a quality cinematic experience, despite the fact that it is an American made film. The performances are fantastic and the plot is one that tells a great deal about family life in the US. Just because it isn't directed by someone with a foreign last name, doesn't have subtitles, and isn't in black in white does not make it a "non-quality" film.

#9 clydefro

clydefro

    waiting for the click

  • MOC Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,056 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 March 2009 - 10:46 AM

Citizen Kane is a film that is considered to be a "quality film" that I, and many others, consider to be more of a technical achievement rather than an entertaining movie, and it would therefore never be put into my 100 favorite films list.


Yeah, it's no Wedding Crashers.

#10 Phatt XIV

Phatt XIV

    La Saraghina

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

Posted 04 March 2009 - 11:04 AM

Yeah, it's no Wedding Crashers.


This is the perfect example of a personal favorite of mine. Criticize me for putting it on my list, but this is not a Site and Sound poll, but a list of MY PERSONAL FAVORITE FILMS. Your sarcastic remark only substantiates the fact regarding how so many people on this forum put their movie preferences on a pedestal, and then criticize others for their picks. It makes no sense considering how these are YOUR favorite films, and should not be measured by what other people think of them. My liking for Wedding Crashers over Citizen Kane (which is not a completely accurate statement) should not rub anyone the wrong way because I am not claiming WC is a better movie then Kane, but just that I enjoyed the film more on a purely entertainment level.

I'm sure some of us could find some weak spots in your list if you posted it, Clydefro.

#11 clydefro

clydefro

    waiting for the click

  • MOC Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,056 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 March 2009 - 12:02 PM

This is the perfect example of a personal favorite of mine. Criticize me for putting it on my list, but this is not a Site and Sound poll, but a list of MY PERSONAL FAVORITE FILMS. Your sarcastic remark only substantiates the fact regarding how so many people on this forum put their movie preferences on a pedestal, and then criticize others for their picks. It makes no sense considering how these are YOUR favorite films, and should not be measured by what other people think of them. My liking for Wedding Crashers over Citizen Kane (which is not a completely accurate statement) should not rub anyone the wrong way because I am not claiming WC is a better movie then Kane, but just that I enjoyed the film more on a purely entertainment level.

I'm sure some of us could find some weak spots in your list if you posted it, Clydefro.


Your posts have so much anger I never know if it's worth even responding to them. I certainly wasn't criticizing your choices because I don't care what YOUR favorites are. If I wanted to criticize them, however, it wouldn't matter if you were listing favorites or bests or Sites or Sights or whatever because it would be well within the discussion. Favorites simply being favorites aren't beyond reproach. If your favorite activity was kicking old ladies in the groin I'd be allowed to state my displeasure for that activity.

What irked me about your slighting of Citizen Kane was how trite, boring and tiresome the supposed complaint was. Your limited praise of it being more a technical achievement than entertainment is such a common and silly response that it seems more regurgitated than thoughtfully considered. Kane is somehow the ultimate "it's good but I don't like it" movie for so many and it's grating for me at this point. If a movie is truly good, great, of high quality, etc., then you should like it. If you don't like it then have the guts to present an argument as to why you don't. I don't disagree with your earlier point that personal appreciation and quality need not be distinguishable, but it seems like you went and presented an example wholly contrary to that idea.

This touches on something that I've discussed before, which is the idea that there are no guilty pleasures and you shouldn't separate your enjoyment of a film from the quality you attach to it. A good movie is a good movie, period. You shouldn't have to use qualifiers. It's the same argument that sometimes holds genre filmmakers as lesser. I see films on an equal plane and find it annoying when others try to build a hierarchy based on invented artistic precepts.

And I did put up a list of 84 films, limited to one per director, on the last forum. It was done completely on the fly. I don't have a list that I keep or update. 100 is arbitrary and not sufficient to include all the movies I'd want to have on a list like that.

#12 marcusbulbous76

marcusbulbous76

    God is in the Details

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 04 March 2009 - 01:22 PM

This touches on something that I've discussed before, which is the idea that there are no guilty pleasures and you shouldn't separate your enjoyment of a film from the quality you attach to it. A good movie is a good movie, period. You shouldn't have to use qualifiers. It's the same argument that sometimes holds genre filmmakers as lesser. I see films on an equal plane and find it annoying when others try to build a hierarchy based on invented artistic precepts.


Very, very good point. I enjoy films that are well-made, rather than imagining to be well-made those films that I enjoy. Or, 'it's good therefore I like it'; not, 'I like it therefore it's good'. We may disagree as to which films are of highest quality, but we'll never disagree that the individual viewer's subjective emotional reactions to films must be subordinate to other standards.

#13 bobham80

bobham80

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dallas, TX

Posted 04 March 2009 - 01:31 PM

If a movie is truly good, great, of high quality, etc., then you should like it.


I can't agree with this. There are several movies that considered to be great and of high quality that I did not like. Since I can't give Kane as an example I’ll give L'Age D'Or. It is considered by some to be the pinnacle of surrealistic film making how to me is a surrealistic bore. L'Avventura is a example of a film that really turns people off on their first viewing, but after multiple viewing they understood the brilliance of it.

Besides what is good, great or of high quality is purely subjective. One man's dump is another man's castle.

This is precisely why I do not put together a top 100 list, if I did I would have to go with personal favorites and the list would certainly include masterpieces like Point Break, Boiler Room and the entire Kevin Smith film filmography. :D

#14 Phatt XIV

Phatt XIV

    La Saraghina

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 289 posts

Posted 04 March 2009 - 01:40 PM

Your posts have so much anger I never know if it's worth even responding to them. I certainly wasn't criticizing your choices because I don't care what YOUR favorites are. If I wanted to criticize them, however, it wouldn't matter if you were listing favorites or bests or Sites or Sights or whatever because it would be well within the discussion. Favorites simply being favorites aren't beyond reproach. If your favorite activity was kicking old ladies in the groin I'd be allowed to state my displeasure for that activity.

What irked me about your slighting of Citizen Kane was how trite, boring and tiresome the supposed complaint was. Your limited praise of it being more a technical achievement than entertainment is such a common and silly response that it seems more regurgitated than thoughtfully considered. Kane is somehow the ultimate "it's good but I don't like it" movie for so many and it's grating for me at this point. If a movie is truly good, great, of high quality, etc., then you should like it. If you don't like it then have the guts to present an argument as to why you don't. I don't disagree with your earlier point that personal appreciation and quality need not be distinguishable, but it seems like you went and presented an example wholly contrary to that idea.

This touches on something that I've discussed before, which is the idea that there are no guilty pleasures and you shouldn't separate your enjoyment of a film from the quality you attach to it. A good movie is a good movie, period. You shouldn't have to use qualifiers. It's the same argument that sometimes holds genre filmmakers as lesser. I see films on an equal plane and find it annoying when others try to build a hierarchy based on invented artistic precepts.

And I did put up a list of 84 films, limited to one per director, on the last forum. It was done completely on the fly. I don't have a list that I keep or update. 100 is arbitrary and not sufficient to include all the movies I'd want to have on a list like that.


I apologize for not stating in depth why I did not thoroughly enjoy Citizen Kane. I didn't particularly enjoy the acting in the film, and besides The Third Man, I have never enjoyed Welles' acting roles (although I haven't seen many of Welles' films). The storyline was interesting, but the notions of greed and obsession (particularly the obsession with success) were over-emphasized in the film, and almost suffocated the film, not allowing it to expand into something more than just being symbolic of American culture. But visually, the film is beautiful and the editing makes the film a lot more exciting and captivating than it should have been.

And for the record, my list was made off the top of my head as well, and I was not in the vicinity of my DVD collection while making it. Looking back, I left off a lot of films I would have included now.

#15 marcusbulbous76

marcusbulbous76

    God is in the Details

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 04 March 2009 - 01:46 PM

I can't agree with this. There are several movies that considered to be great and of high quality that I did not like. Since I can't give Kane as an example I’ll give L'Age D'Or. It is considered by some to be the pinnacle of surrealistic film making how to me is a surrealistic bore. L'Avventura is a example of a film that really turns people off on their first viewing, but after multiple viewing they understood the brilliance of it.

Besides what is good, great or of high quality is purely subjective. One man's dump is another man's castle.

This is precisely why I do not put together a top 100 list, if I did I would have to go with personal favorites and the list would certainly include masterpieces like Point Break, Boiler Room and the entire Kevin Smith film filmography. :D


Bob, I'll agree that quality is subjective, but isn't it still true that you don't think L'age D'or is a great film? How can you, you don't like it? You're just allowing what others have said about its greatness to color your view of it. If you didn't like it, then say it's not great. But you should say so for rational reasons, not just that it was boring or something. If you like it more after further viewings, then possibly your ways of arriving at what is quality in film have been revised. I only mean we can't only go off what we feel, because what we feel is pure subjectivity and puts our own feelings above any other consideration. I may feel like There Will be Blood should have ended differently, but how I feel has nothing to do with the integrity of the film's vision or its filmmakers intentions. I'm challenged by it and that causes me to grow as a thinking person.

#16 hal0000

hal0000

    Judge Judy and Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 568 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 March 2009 - 02:38 PM

I agree with marcus. A film's greatness is purely dependent on the viewer's own thoughts. A somewhat lesser example, but I don't think de Palma's Scarface is a great movie or even a good one, for that matter. Even if everyone else on the planet thinks it's the greatest thing on earth and it's number one of the Sight and Sound poll, I will still say it's not a great film, and I would do my best to back up that opinion.

On a similar note, I'm also wary of calling a film my favorite just because it's canonical. Even though Citizen Kane was my very first DVD and catalyzed my collection, I've only recently considered it my favorite. The reason being is that I don't want a film's reputation to guide my opinion of it. I had to see it 7-8 times before I could see past it's reputation and realize what an extraordinary work it is (and I do like the acting). Maybe this is why I'm not too fond of commentaries... While insightful and certainly capable of enhancing my appreciation or understanding of a film, I tend to avoid commentaries until I've seen a film 4-5 times to establish my own opinion on it. I'd rather not have a commentary form the basis of my understanding.

11. Eyes Wide Shut - Stanley Kubrick

62. Apocolype Now! Redux - Francis Ford Coppola

90. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring - Peter Jackson


I'm glad to see Eyes Wide Shut on your list (along with Amadeus). I haven't seen Apocalypse Now: Redux in some time now (maybe time for a revisit?), but my original impression was that the pacing seemed off and some of Willard's new scenes seemed to clash with my perception of him in the 1979 cut. So I was a little surprised to see Redux on your list, but like I've said, I may need to revisit it.

I think The Fellowship of the Ring is my favorite of the three (if I were forced to choose), but I've always liked Jackson's King Kong more than LOTR for some reason.


11. Ben-Hur (1959: Joseph L. Mankiewicz)



I don't remember Mank having a hand in Ben-Hur...

#17 masterofoneinchpunch

masterofoneinchpunch

    The Artful Dodger

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,371 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Modesto, CA
  • Interests:NBA, MMA, Movies, Setting fires.

Posted 04 March 2009 - 02:47 PM

I agree with marcus. A film's greatness is purely dependent on the viewer's own thoughts. A somewhat lesser example, but I don't think de Palma's Scarface is a great movie or even a good one, for that matter. Even if everyone else on the planet thinks it's the greatest thing on earth and it's number one of the Sight and Sound poll, I will still say it's not a great film, and I would do my best to back up that opinion.

On a similar note, I'm also wary of calling a film my favorite just because it's canonical. Even though Citizen Kane was my very first DVD and catalyzed my collection, I've only recently considered it my favorite. The reason being is that I don't want a film's reputation to guide my opinion of it. I had to see it 7-8 times before I could see past it's reputation and realize what an extraordinary work it is (and I do like the acting). Maybe this is why I'm not too fond of commentaries... While insightful and certainly capable of enhancing my appreciation or understanding of a film, I tend to avoid commentaries until I've seen a film 4-5 times to establish my own opinion on it. I'd rather not have a commentary form the basis of my understanding.


One of the biggest problems I have with commentaries is that I normally focus on the picture and lose sometimes a bit of what the commentator has to say. I originally thought that commentaries would have a bigger influence on what I thought, but I tend to use them for informational purposes only (though it is interested to hear their opinions etc...). Extras do tend to improve my opinion of a film, but that tends to be short lived while I dwell on the movie. I also don't tend to push a movie high until I have thought about it (or it makes me think about it). For example Raise the Red Lantern is one that I've thought about (and several others of Zhang Yimou) and am considering putting it in my top 100.

I certainly have some favorites that I'm sure people will question (and a gaggle of canon fodder) but I am always willing to give my reasons for.

I don't think Scarface from De Palma will ever be considered that great :D from a mass of critics.
Under Construction:
My Criterion Collection (408; I Own and Have Watched):
1-16, 18, 19, 20, 21(2nd), 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51(1st & 2nd), 52, 52, 53, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86. 87, 88, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 105, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 121, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151(1st), 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 164, 165, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 180, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 201, 202, 204, 205, 206, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 224, 226, 227, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 237, 239, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 260, 263, 266, 267, 268, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 297, 298, 300(2D), 301, 302, 304, 305, 306, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 335, 336, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 351, 352, 353, 354, 357, 358, 359, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 378, 379, 380, 383, 385, 386, 387, 388, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 402, 404, 405, 408, 409, 410, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 424, 425, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 437, 439, 441, 445, 446, 447, 448, 451, 453, 455, 456, 457, 459, 460, 461, 462, 465, 470, 475, 476, 478, 481, 482, 487, 490, 497, 498, 499, 500, 501, 503, 505, 512, 524, 525, 526, 528, 529, 530, 531, 539, 540, 543, 556, 565, 572, 578, 579, 580, 586, 596, 650, 664, 677

Previous Editions: 2,
Eclipse: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 23, 26, 33

“Empty your bladder of that bitter black urine you call coffee.” – The Tick

My HK movie reviews
My Amazon Reviews

#18 marcusbulbous76

marcusbulbous76

    God is in the Details

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 04 March 2009 - 03:00 PM

I agree with marcus. A film's greatness is purely dependent on the viewer's own thoughts. A somewhat lesser example, but I don't think de Palma's Scarface is a great movie or even a good one, for that matter. Even if everyone else on the planet thinks it's the greatest thing on earth and it's number one of the Sight and Sound poll, I will still say it's not a great film, and I would do my best to back up that opinion.


That's not exactly what I meant. I wouldn't say that a film's greatness is dependent on the viewer's own thoughts. I am saying that there should be no difference between what you like and what you think is great. The first should be dependent on the second, so to me it makes no sense to say 'Citizen Kane is great but I didn't like it when I saw it'. If you didn't like it, why do you still think it's great? In other words, one should like what is great. So rather than seeking out those things that cater to our subjective emotions, we should cultivate a working theory of what constitutes greatness in film art. Subjectivity can always creep in at that point, but if we're mindful of the impossibility of avoiding subjectivity that's the best we can do.

#19 hal0000

hal0000

    Judge Judy and Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 568 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 March 2009 - 04:50 PM

^ Ah, thanks for clarifying. That still makes sense though. If you consider something to be great, then there is no reason that it shouldn't be one of your favorites. That is, greatness and preference go hand in hand, it's just that preference cannot really determine how great something is. i.e., I like Paths of Glory more than Dr. Strangelove (sorry master :unsure: ) because I think it is the greater film.

#20 bobham80

bobham80

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dallas, TX

Posted 04 March 2009 - 07:27 PM

What about a film like Salo? Why can't someone say, "It's a work of art, it is great for what it is, however I hated it." Should they have to qualify that statement if more in depth analys as to why or cant we infer that the reason that they might not like is because of content, rather than the quality of the film.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users