What is a "good movie"?

What is a "good movie"?

It seems like everyone hates every new movie that comes out. I'm not trying to group everyone like that, it's just what I notice.

Everyone has there opinion man. It is annoying that people don't give a balance critic of a movie instead of saying "It sucked".

But for me personally for a movie to be good... It has to wow me. I Have to be on the edge of my seat and unaware of what is going to happen in the end.

Depends on your preference. For me it has to have a solid story, good acting, good directing, dialogue is a big thing for me, good cinematography helps. For some people its only afew thingsthat makes a movie good, to others its a lot.

good movies to me have good acting and johnny deppJPOBS

good movies to me have good acting and johnny deppJPOBS

Good story, good characters, good acting, good presentation.

I think for starters, a movie has to succeed at what it's trying to do. For example, Watchmen tried to do a lot of things, and failed at most of them. So Watchmen sucked. Meanwhile, Gremlins was cheap stupid entertainment, but it succeeded at what it was trying to do. So in that sense, at least it's not a failure.

However, not being a failure is no guarantee that a movie is good. For example, Gremlins is not good. It's not good, because there's absolutely no substance to the movie. But it's still fun, even if it's trash. And that's enough, if all you want is trash.

However, that's not to say that all trashy movies are okay as long as they don't try to be anything other than trash. Some trashy stupid movies have internal logical inconsistencies, plot wholes big enough to drive a tank through, and a total lack of a sense of pacing and directing.

There's really no one thing that we can point to to say that it makes a movie good. Art doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way with music, paintings, or photography, and it doesn't work that way with movies. However, that's also not to say that all opinions about a movie are equally valid. Like art requires talent and work, art criticism also requires talent and work (albeit to a lesser degree). Not all opinions are equal, and some movies are just plain bad.

Higher Learning is a good movieProtestTheJOEL

No it isn't. It TRIED to be a good movie, and I'm never one to give people a hard time for trying. But the movie sucked.It was a cliched and overly simplistic hokey mess of a movie.

When I watch it, there are times when I think that it MIGHT turn into a good movie, but that just never happens.

Boyz In the Hood was far better, and even that movie is hard to watch these days without getting the sense that it's cheesy as hell. Menace II Society was far better.

Higher Learning is a good movieProtestTheJOEL

No it isn't. It TRIED to be a good movie, and I'm never one to give people a hard time for trying. But the movie sucked.It was a cliched and overly simplistic hokey mess of a movie.

When I watch it, there are times when I think that it MIGHT turn into a good movie, but that just never happens.

Boyz In the Hood was far better, and even that movie is hard to watch these days without getting the sense that it's cheesy as hell. Menace II Society was far better.

Forrest Gump

I think for starters, a movie has to succeed at what it's trying to do. For example, Watchmen tried to do a lot of things, and failed at most of them. So Watchmen sucked. Meanwhile, Gremlins was cheap stupid entertainment, but it succeeded at what it was trying to do. So in that sense, at least it's not a failure.

However, not being a failure is no guarantee that a movie is good. For example, Gremlins is not good. It's not good, because there's absolutely no substance to the movie. But it's still fun, even if it's trash. And that's enough, if all you want is trash.

However, that's not to say that all trashy movies are okay as long as they don't try to be anything other than trash. Some trashy stupid movies have internal logical inconsistencies, plot wholes big enough to drive a tank through, and a total lack of a sense of pacing and directing.

There's really no one thing that we can point to to say that it makes a movie good. Art doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way with music, paintings, or photography, and it doesn't work that way with movies. However, that's also not to say that all opinions about a movie are equally valid. Like art requires talent and work, art criticism also requires talent and work (albeit to a lesser degree). Not all opinions are equal, and some movies are just plain bad.

MrGeezer

MrGeezer sir... Im a huge fan... but

How can you say watchman sucked...?

Full Metal Jacket...

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]good movies to me have good acting and johnny deppsammyjenkis898

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]good movies to me have good acting and johnny deppgamerguru100

Johnny Depp is amazing. Your crazy!

Good directing leads to good storytelling, and good acting leads to good character develop. That's basically what I want - a good story and good characters. Cinematrography is also a huge plus.

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]good movies to me have good acting and johnny deppsammyjenkis898

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"]

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]good movies to me have good acting and johnny deppcluelesspug

Johnny Depp is amazing. Your crazy!

A good movie is a movie that makes me think about it after watching it, and not coming up with many things to not like about it.

A movie that doesn't make me think at all isn't a good movie.

A good movie is a movie that gives you enjoyment based on what it set out to do. If you enjoy a movie because you're laughing so hard at how badly it fails, then it's different. And if you don't enjoy it, then it's not good. Appreciation of art is a purely subjective thing, and anyone who tells you differently is a pompous jerk.savebattery

It's not a purely subjective thing, and I'm not a pompous jerk. Appreciation of art is LARGELY subjective, but part of the process of criticism is a thorough evaluation of what is OBJECTIVELY shown.

Again, art criticism is more than just saying "I liked it, so it's good." Just because you like it doesn't mean it's good. I love plenty of movies that I will happily admit are total trash, and I've recently developed a taste for fried pork cracklings, even though those are about the closest to garbage that a person can eat without LITERALLY eating garbage.

Thorough art criticism requires a thorough look at the OBJECTIVE qualities being shown, and an ability to coherently relate those objective qualities to the subjective qualities of human emotion. Simply LIKING a movie does NOT mean that it is good in any way. Many people walk out of a movie theater with their opinions of the movie they just saw being based purely on how they FELT. And yet they skimmed over the part that requires them to THINK about the movie's OBJECTIVE qualities.

good movies to me have good acting and johnny deppJPOBS

Good directing leads to good storytelling, and good acting leads to good character develop. That's basically what I want - a good story and good characters. Cinematrography is also a huge plus.

Nerd_Man

That doesn't really address the point of the question. If we are to say that a good movie is a movie that has a good plot, good script, good acting, and good directing, then what makes THOSE aspects "good"?

[QUOTE="cluelesspug"]

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"]Can you define "good acting" more specifically?

gamerguru100

Johnny Depp is amazing. Your crazy!

[QUOTE="savebattery"]A good movie is a movie that gives you enjoyment based on what it set out to do. If you enjoy a movie because you're laughing so hard at how badly it fails, then it's different. And if you don't enjoy it, then it's not good. Appreciation of art is a purely subjective thing, and anyone who tells you differently is a pompous jerk.MrGeezer

It's not a purely subjective thing, and I'm not a pompous jerk. Appreciation of art is LARGELY subjective, but part of the process of criticism is a thorough evaluation of what is OBJECTIVELY shown.

Again, art criticism is more than just saying "I liked it, so it's good." Just because you like it doesn't mean it's good. I love plenty of movies that I will happily admit are total trash, and I've recently developed a taste for fried pork cracklings, even though those are about the closest to garbage that a person can eat without LITERALLY eating garbage.

Thorough art criticism requires a thorough look at the OBJECTIVE qualities being shown, and an ability to coherently relate those objective qualities to the subjective qualities of human emotion. Simply LIKING a movie does NOT mean that it is good in any way. Many people walk out of a movie theater with their opinions of the movie they just saw being based purely on how they FELT. And yet they skimmed over the part that requires them to THINK about the movie's OBJECTIVE qualities.

Most good movies tend to have interesting characters in interesting situations doing interesting things and having interesting things happen to them.

[QUOTE="Nerd_Man"]

Good directing leads to good storytelling, and good acting leads to good character develop. That's basically what I want - a good story and good characters. Cinematrography is also a huge plus.

MrGeezer

That doesn't really address the point of the question. If we are to say that a good movie is a movie that has a good plot, good script, good acting, and good directing, then what makes THOSE aspects "good"?

[QUOTE="Nerd_Man"]

Good directing leads to good storytelling, and good acting leads to good character develop. That's basically what I want - a good story and good characters. Cinematrography is also a huge plus.

MrGeezer

That doesn't really address the point of the question. If we are to say that a good movie is a movie that has a good plot, good script, good acting, and good directing, then what makes THOSE aspects "good"?

Yeah it does. My answer may be a bit vague, but that's essentially what makes a good movie.

As for my own opinion, it could vary from film to film... Some films may be all around good, but overall the concept might not be my cup of tea. Doesn't mean it's a bad film, just not my thing. I don't really have a specific theme or genre I'm looking for in a film. I ultimately want a good story and character development, and if the overall package appeals to me, then I'll see it.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="savebattery"]A good movie is a movie that gives you enjoyment based on what it set out to do. If you enjoy a movie because you're laughing so hard at how badly it fails, then it's different. And if you don't enjoy it, then it's not good. Appreciation of art is a purely subjective thing, and anyone who tells you differently is a pompous jerk.savebattery

It's not a purely subjective thing, and I'm not a pompous jerk. Appreciation of art is LARGELY subjective, but part of the process of criticism is a thorough evaluation of what is OBJECTIVELY shown.

Again, art criticism is more than just saying "I liked it, so it's good." Just because you like it doesn't mean it's good. I love plenty of movies that I will happily admit are total trash, and I've recently developed a taste for fried pork cracklings, even though those are about the closest to garbage that a person can eat without LITERALLY eating garbage.

Thorough art criticism requires a thorough look at the OBJECTIVE qualities being shown, and an ability to coherently relate those objective qualities to the subjective qualities of human emotion. Simply LIKING a movie does NOT mean that it is good in any way. Many people walk out of a movie theater with their opinions of the movie they just saw being based purely on how they FELT. And yet they skimmed over the part that requires them to THINK about the movie's OBJECTIVE qualities.

The objective qualities of a movie are obviously different for every single movie that has ever been made. What is objective is literally "what is shown", and that's different for every single movie.

However, one of the wild cards is how much effort the viewer is willing to make in order to SEE what is shown.

The objective qualities of a movie are obviously different for every single movie that has ever been made. What is objective is literally "what is shown", and that's different for every single movie.

However, one of the wild cards is how much effort the viewer is willing to make in order to SEE what is shown.

MrGeezer

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="Nerd_Man"]

Good directing leads to good storytelling, and good acting leads to good character develop. That's basically what I want - a good story and good characters. Cinematrography is also a huge plus.

sammyjenkis898

That doesn't really address the point of the question. If we are to say that a good movie is a movie that has a good plot, good script, good acting, and good directing, then what makes THOSE aspects "good"?

No, it really doesn't. If a good movie is a movie with good acting and good directing, then that statement really doesn't mean anything without some elaboration on what constitutes good acting and good directing.

[QUOTE="sammyjenkis898"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

That doesn't really address the point of the question. If we are to say that a good movie is a movie that has a good plot, good script, good acting, and good directing, then what makes THOSE aspects "good"?

MrGeezer

No, it really doesn't. If a good movie is a movie with good acting and good directing, then that statement really doesn't mean anything without some elaboration on what constitutes good acting and good directing.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

The objective qualities of a movie are obviously different for every single movie that has ever been made. What is objective is literally "what is shown", and that's different for every single movie.

However, one of the wild cards is how much effort the viewer is willing to make in order to SEE what is shown.

savebattery

"What is shown" IS a valid answer if only BECAUSE it is the ONLY thing that the artist has any control over.

I've seen people come here and saying that 12 Monkeys is a bad movie because it is too confusing. Terry Gilliam made that movie very clear and straightforward, and it's about as easy to follow as your standard episode of Saturday morning cartoons. To this day, I STILL see tons of people claiming that the point of the first two Terminator movies is that we are in charge of our own fate, and that the future is not set. And these aren't even some Lynch or Jodorowski films, these are popcorn Hollywood movies about damn time travel.

The fact is that proper criticism STARTS with mere OBSERVATION. This is purely objective, and it entails nothing other than merely WATCHING WHAT IS SHOWN. And yet audiences often fail to do even that.

Now, it takes another step to make the jump from internally describing a movie to making a judgement about its worth, but the director isn't in control over people's judgements.

[QUOTE="savebattery"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

The objective qualities of a movie are obviously different for every single movie that has ever been made. What is objective is literally "what is shown", and that's different for every single movie.

However, one of the wild cards is how much effort the viewer is willing to make in order to SEE what is shown.

MrGeezer

"What is shown" IS a valid answer if only BECAUSE it is the ONLY thing that the artist has any control over.

I've seen people come here and saying that 12 Monkeys is a bad movie because it is too confusing. Terry Gilliam made that movie very clear and straightforward, and it's about as easy to follow as your standard episode of Saturday morning cartoons. To this day, I STILL see tons of people claiming that the point of the first two Terminator movies is that we are in charge of our own fate, and that the future is not set. And these aren't even some Lynch or Jodorowski films, these are popcorn Hollywood movies about damn time travel.

The fact is that proper criticism STARTS with mere OBSERVATION. This is purely objective, and it entails nothing other than merely WATCHING WHAT IS SHOWN. And yet audiences often fail to do even that.

Now, it takes another step to make the jump from internally describing a movie to making a judgement about its worth, but the director isn't in control over people's judgements.

[QUOTE="savebattery"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

The objective qualities of a movie are obviously different for every single movie that has ever been made. What is objective is literally "what is shown", and that's different for every single movie.

However, one of the wild cards is how much effort the viewer is willing to make in order to SEE what is shown.

MrGeezer

"What is shown" IS a valid answer if only BECAUSE it is the ONLY thing that the artist has any control over.

I've seen people come here and saying that 12 Monkeys is a bad movie because it is too confusing. Terry Gilliam made that movie very clear and straightforward, and it's about as easy to follow as your standard episode of Saturday morning cartoons. To this day, I STILL see tons of people claiming that the point of the first two Terminator movies is that we are in charge of our own fate, and that the future is not set. And these aren't even some Lynch or Jodorowski films, these are popcorn Hollywood movies about damn time travel.

The fact is that proper criticism STARTS with mere OBSERVATION. This is purely objective, and it entails nothing other than merely WATCHING WHAT IS SHOWN. And yet audiences often fail to do even that.

Now, it takes another step to make the jump from internally describing a movie to making a judgement about its worth, but the director isn't in control over people's judgements.

I think you're taking my simple answer too seriously.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="savebattery"] "What is shown" is not a valid answer because the appreciation and relevance of "what is shown" is subjective.savebattery

"What is shown" IS a valid answer if only BECAUSE it is the ONLY thing that the artist has any control over.

I've seen people come here and saying that 12 Monkeys is a bad movie because it is too confusing. Terry Gilliam made that movie very clear and straightforward, and it's about as easy to follow as your standard episode of Saturday morning cartoons. To this day, I STILL see tons of people claiming that the point of the first two Terminator movies is that we are in charge of our own fate, and that the future is not set. And these aren't even some Lynch or Jodorowski films, these are popcorn Hollywood movies about damn time travel.

The fact is that proper criticism STARTS with mere OBSERVATION. This is purely objective, and it entails nothing other than merely WATCHING WHAT IS SHOWN. And yet audiences often fail to do even that.

Now, it takes another step to make the jump from internally describing a movie to making a judgement about its worth, but the director isn't in control over people's judgements.

No, whether or not said observations speak to positive or negative qualities is contingent upon whether or not yor judgement of the work is adequately backed up by what was shown.

Theoretically, everyone SHOULD see the exact same thing when they watch they same movie. Granted, that's not always the case, since some people won't even put in the effort required to pay attention to what's on the screen. But let's assume that it is the case. Suppose you have two people watching the same movie. Both of them are paying equal attention to the movie. One dude hates it, the other dude loves it. Somewhere there is a disconnect between the movie's OBJECTIVE qualities, and the SUBJECTIVE interpretation made by the viewer.

Now, here's the thing. Each of these viewers should be able to adequately explain WHY they thought the movie was good.

But in real life, it doesn't work that way. Which is why we have people defending stuff such as Transformers and Star Trek and Terminator 4 by saying "come on, it's just a summer action movie, not Citizen Kane".

That depends on how I look at "good." The Dark Knight is one of my favorite movie, but I wouldn't consider it one of the best movies ever. It's my favorite because it is highly entertaining, and it is nice to see it spill into the other category a bit. Movies that I would put on a "best ever" list would be movies that challenge and present ideas, make you think. Movies like Blade Runner, Children of Men, Pan's Labyrinth, and Pi.

The Odd Couple