Agree with Q here (although I can't tell if he's serious or not). We do it all the time with films. Look at the Harry Potter movies, the Saw franchise, the Paranormal Activity movies... the frakin Call of Duty franchise...
Printable View
Agree with Q here (although I can't tell if he's serious or not). We do it all the time with films. Look at the Harry Potter movies, the Saw franchise, the Paranormal Activity movies... the frakin Call of Duty franchise...
Nah, I'm pretty sure letting people like what they want is a good thing.
Why? I don't think that's quite what you are actually arguing. By that I mean people can like whatever they want on a personal level.Quote:
Originally Posted by megladon8
But it's letting people express an appreciation for what they like publicly that's the issue. Because I'm not going to say anything disparaging to someone who reads Twilight just because they read it. I'm going to say something to them when they enter into a conversation with me and claim that it's the best vampire series of all time or some such.
And as D and I have expressed this is precisely when someone should weigh in because these opinions do change the industry. Just as political beliefs have ramifications politically. These beliefs have repercussions upon our lives. Flip through a TV's channels and the majority of programming is just god awful. Imagine if it could be better? Well, the public at large demanding higher standards is the only thing that will make it better. And not giving higher ratings to Jersey Shore, Springer and other such crapola will help to that end.
Don't you want me to cleanse your soul from your love of Halo? :PQuote:
Originally Posted by megladon8
On another note, examples of exceptional art at a child's level... The Red Balloon (film) and The Little Prince (book).
Of course speaking your mind in a conversation is acceptable and expected, but what is all this about silencing people from promoting things publicly because you don't like them? That's getting into some seriously disturbing Nazi shit right there.
We also seem to be of this mind that today is the only time there has ever been shit media/art out there. Time is the great equalizer - in 20 years no one is going to remember "Jersey Shore" or Snooki. All through recorded history there's been shit. We just remember the good stuff.
Screw you guys, I'm reading Sphere.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...psc787a290.jpg
AARAHGHHGGHH! Dude! You're totally creasing the spine!
And with that, the discussion has run its course.Quote:
Originally Posted by megladon8
Look at me. Does it look like I care? Because I don't. I'm reading Sphere. To hell with your bourgeois worries.Quote:
Originally Posted by D_Davis
I have a first edition hard cover copy of "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown, signed and dated by James Patterson, and with a limited edition forward by John Grisham.
I don't know, I didn't read the whole discussion, but I'm not advocating that.Quote:
Originally Posted by megladon8
I don't buy this line of argumentation. I can only speak to films because that's where I've done the most research, but I've gone through lists of films over the years and there are two major trends. The first trend is that over the last hundred years more and more films are made per year. The number of films made in 1940 is significantly smaller than the number of films made in 2011.Quote:
Originally Posted by megladon8
Secondly, as a result of this you can calculate a rough proportion of good films to bad (in a very broad sense, not arguing the nitty gritty of what's better or worse but I think we can all agree that say The Godfather is better made than The Room for instance). And I've found that there's a much higher proportion of good films to bad in certain eras. Certainly there's peaks and valleys and things move back and forth, not saying it's been a downward trend or anything but proportionally we should be doing a lot better than we are these days just given the sheer quantity of films that are created.
The issue is that we can't remember the good stuff if the good stuff doesn't get enough viewings or support initially to take off or even get funding in the first place so that it can come into existence. I'll give you an example, I just watched the behind the scenes of the making of Seinfeld. And they were saying how unheard of it was that they got their show made. A show with a bunch of people who hadn't done anything in TV before and the network execs just said we like your style and gave them a chance but even then Larry and Jerry had to fight them on a number of particulars in order to keep the show going their way. And even now the networks haven't learned from this and don't do programming a similar way, the only exception being HBO.
Instead we get garbage shows that test well in focus groups because they appeal to a large demographic of people with shitty taste because no one is going up to them and saying your taste is shit please change it for the good of culture.
Nope, sorry. That's just your opinion. That The Room is better than The Godfather is an equally valid opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qrazy
You should put that on E-bay, and use the money to buy some good books.Quote:
Originally Posted by megladon8
I never understood that "hey, at least they're reading!" argument of why it's OK that people read crap like 50 Shades of Grey. Would you say "hey, at least they're watching television!" about a person who watches and loves Honey Boo Boo? Or, "hey, at least they're playing video games!" about a person playing and loving Big Rig Truckers?
It's as if reading is so rare that we should be thankful that people are reading at all, and that it doesn't matter what they are reading. I remember when my students told me they only liked to read magazines. Should teachers allow that to pass? No.
As champions of good media - which we all are here - we should do what we can to promote good stuff and get people into thinking about the things they spend their money and time on.
Don't we come back around to this argument every few harvest moons? Fortunately for me, everyone I know around me who consumes arrant trash also consumes better material as well, so there's a balance not unlike a moderate food diet. Except my brother. He has shitty taste in horror movies.
Also, was just wondering (before Q's post) if someone had mentioned The Little Prince. I gave that to my mom to read since I felt she'd like it. I'd also give it to younger cousins in a heartbeat.
Also also, Sphere is awesome.
Balance is good.
Next time I see a guy drinking a miller lite, I'm gonna say, "hey, at least he's drinking."
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by bac0n
I'm with Winston. Godwin should be an automatic topic switcher.
Not being a Narnia fan is a terrible reason for not being a Lewis fan.Quote:
Originally Posted by number8
IMO it's preposterous to claim that any quality-judgement is anything but a matter of opinion. What's wrong with quality just being whatever you like? Why does there have to be some objective "good" media which inevitably corrisponds to the media you happen to consume? Just enjoy what you enjoy.Quote:
Originally Posted by D_Davis
Hey - there's a dead horse that needs a beatin'.Quote:
Originally Posted by number8
Those of us who do care have already answered this in previous posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by romantisaurusrex