What should version watch next - Tenet ot Oppenheimer?

Tenet or Oppenheimer

  • Tenet

    Votes: 5 62.5%

  • Oppenheimer

    Votes: 3 37.5%
  • Total voters
    8
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Usually if two people give me their thoughts on something and one of them says 'it's a masterpiece' while the other one reels off a list of basic errors and things they found profoundly unsatisfactory it's the latter reviewer whom I find more credible, and the former whom I just think missed a lot or is a bit simple.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
dilbert1 said:
In any event, it should be left open as to whether someone who has seen a film or an artwork in person might have their mind changed by reading a good critic’s analysis and interpretation. Even though good criticism of that kind takes a great deal of knowledge and skill (which may be in short supply) to produce.
Click to expand...
The extent to which this may happen must depend on the type of enjoyment derived. If the viewer had enjoyed the film because it had conveyed some sort of message and then found out it was a satire saying the opposite then it may well deflate their enthusiasm for the thing. But in other cases I'm not so sure. The primary role of film critics or of film studies should be to enhance the scope of one's possible enjoyment, in the same way that people can be led to enjoy different genres of music by having their attention directed to the parts that are supposed to be attended to. This is not to say that their roles are evaluative thereby; they are merely applying lubricant along the various paths of enjoyment.

Film studies types' eagerness to evaluate seems a bit odd because one's work as a student would involve analysis not evaluation.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Clinamenic said:
But you have to admit that @danno340, @davidjukebox and @baby_joe are renowned film critiques with a very refined taste, as evidenced by their youtube reviews.
Click to expand...
The existence of supertasters has been proven scientifically; please direct to us peer review proof of cinematic supertasters.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Lehrl conceptualised intelligence as comprising processing speed and working memory. Cinematic supertasters have very high processing speed, meaning that they are able to take in more frames per second, and very high working memory meaning that they are able to integrate myriad sequences of action over different timescales. Measurements of processing speed and working memory were found to correlate very positively with appreciation of the films of D. Lynch and to correlate negatively with those of C. Nolan. Further research will be required to confirm the relationship between psychometric abilities and FoAQaDQ (Films of Agreed Quality and Disquality).
 
Clinamenic

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
The films good, Nolan's best in my opinion, but I think its reach exceeded its grasp a bit, which honestly is normal for films that ambitious. It could have been great - it could have been Nolan's masterpiece - if it handled a couple things differently, in my opinion. Just my opinion, which doesn't bar someone else from considering it a masterpiece.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
kid charlemagne said:
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.
Click to expand...
But if someone says the director is bad because the dialogue was mumbled or the soundtrack was too loud or the explosion was too small or the plot didn't make sense, those are things that are pretty objective that you can check yourself when your masterpiece grading comes up for review.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top