2 ms·
Not really. Jurassic Park is a good movie, the framing, editing, script, fx work, performances, music all come together really well. Birdemic is a bad movie, i
by dragonsngoblins 8y ago
Not really. Jurassic Park is a good movie, the framing, editing, script, fx work, performances, music all come together really well.
Birdemic is a bad movie, in that none of the individual components are good and they don't complement each other well at all.
I'd argue that both are interesting
- taneq 8y agoSo there are good and bad movies, and orthogonally, boring and interesting movies. :)
- tombert 8y agoYeah, maybe I should clarify; there are "good" and "bad" movies from a theoretical level. My enjoyment largely rests on how interesting I find them. Objectively terrible movies like "The Happening" or "The Room" or "Samurai Cop" or "Troll 2" or "Angry Red Planet" are "bad" because whomever made them seems to have no understanding of film-theory, or what it would take to make a "good" movie, but I find them endlessly entertaining...like watching a trainwreck The irony of it is that if they had tried to make those moves "bad" on purpose, they wouldn't be interesting at all (at least not to me), and they would just be "bad" on every level for me. In fact, even when there is sincerity, it's not a truly deterministic system. I think that the first Troll movie is technically objectively worse than Troll 2, but I find Troll 1 to be pretty boring, in addition to being incompetent, while Troll 2 is silly and an utter blast to watch.