| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Sal[Au]pian 
"Four ever European"
|
 Posted - 07/02/2008 : 13:20:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
Lists such as in that article have a habit of annoyingly using the term "Best Movie" when what they mean is "Most Popular Movie". They're not the same thing at all.
Except that, in democratic terms, they kinda are...
I disagree. "Four Weddings and a Funeral" is more famous today than "A Clockwork Orange", so more people will pick it as best British film. Someone who has only seen one of two movies is in no position to judge which of the two is best.
But it's not more famous by magic or because of a conspiracy. I grant you that it will have been marketed more, but that is because it is the kind of film that more people would like. Also, Clockwork Orange is an unusual case as no one was able to see it for ages, but in general the films that would be popular do become popular. (Also, it is a good adaptation, but still only an adaptation. Much that is good about it it deserves no credit for.) No one has seen all films, so having not seen other films cannot really be brought in as a valid variable.
Of course I strongly disagree subjectively, but what better objective criterion for the quality of a film can there be than the total enjoyment it has provided? |
 |
|
|
Beanmimo 
"August review site"
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 13:43:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
Movies such as:-
Lists such as in that article have a habit of annoyingly using the term "Best Movie" when what they mean is "Most Popular Movie". They're not the same thing at all.
Sean, I'd go even further than that.
The filums that top these lists are generally "The most Popular Movies Right Now" as their tastes change and memories fade. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 14:47:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
Of course I strongly disagree subjectively, but what better objective criterion for the quality of a film can there be than the total enjoyment it has provided?
Enlighten me. How exactly do you objectively measure the total enjoyment a film has provided?
|
|
|
|
Sal[Au]pian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 15:02:19
|
| One cannot of course (I didn't say one could), but a reasonably close proportional approximation is the number of people who cite it as the film they enjoyed the most. |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea 
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 15:12:48
|
| A qualitative list is inherently pointless, as it doesn't agree with my or your personal tastes. And as such its equally useless to try and suggest improvements -- it's a list, guys. |
|
|
|
lemmycaution 
"Long mired in film"
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 15:41:40
|
Well, I just don't see how there's anything "objective" here, other than the process of counting up the votes of course. |
|
|
|
Sal[Au]pian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 16:08:52
|
| Um, counting is normally considered pretty objective... |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 16:21:53
|
Yes, as I said, the counting is the only part which I can see as being objective, but the "total enjoyment [a film] has provided" is not.
|
|
|
|
Sal[Au]pian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 16:39:38
|
| As I've already said, I'm positing that the proportions of people who cite films as their favourite will be similar to the ratios of total enjoyment that those films provide. This of course is not logically certain, but I really think it's pretty likely, especially at the higher-proportion end of the spectrum. It's the more esoteric films which may be loved by some but provide little enjoyment for many others. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 16:48:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
As I've already said, I'm positing that the proportions of people who cite films as their favourite will be similar to the ratios of total enjoyment that those films provide.
The "ratios of total enjoyment" to what?
|
|
|
|
Sal[Au]pian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 17:25:57
|
To each other, of course.
I am saying that for films X, Y and Z, if x% : y% : z% of people say that it is their favourite, then the total enjoyment of the films for all viewers will probably be roughly xk : yk : zk, where k is a constant. The correlation will decrease with more unusual films, but for the bulk of films I would expect it to be fairly strong, at least for films that are anyone's favourite. (Some films will of course be no one's favourite but still provide some level of enjoyment.) |
|
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 17:35:55
|
Oh pul-eeze! There is only one objective criterion for the Best Films. It is, of course, my own list.
 
|
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 19:37:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
To each other, of course.
I am saying that for films X, Y and Z, if x% : y% : z% of people say that it is their favourite, then the total enjoyment of the films for all viewers will probably be roughly xk : yk : zk, where k is a constant. The correlation will decrease with more unusual films, but for the bulk of films I would expect it to be fairly strong, at least for films that are anyone's favourite. (Some films will of course be no one's favourite but still provide some level of enjoyment.)
Oh, I see, you're saying that people generally say their favourite film is the one they most enjoyed watching.
Wow, that is insightful. Thanks for sharing that with us.
|
|
|
|
Sal[Au]pian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 07/03/2008 : 00:35:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Oh, I see, you're saying that people generally say their favourite film is the one they most enjoyed watching.
No, I didn't say that. Surprise, surprise -- you're once again responding to what you have imagined that I have said rather than to what I have actually said. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Best British film of all time
