What makes a movie objectively good/bad? Specifically the Transformers Movies?

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by Zemah, Aug 25, 2020.


Can a movie be objectively good/bad?

  1. Yes!

    18 vote(s)
  2. No!

    7 vote(s)
  3. Maybe...

    2 vote(s)
  4. Not sure...

    3 vote(s)
  5. It depends.

    12 vote(s)
  1. ChaosDonkey

    ChaosDonkey Lord Brain

    Apr 9, 2012
    Trophy Points:
    If you can't remove the self from any kind of analysis, then you will struggle to look at anything objectively.
  2. Gumblor Gimbles

    Gumblor Gimbles Norn' Ironhide

    Aug 7, 2019
    News Credits:
    Trophy Points:
    Your Attic
    For those who aren’t sure, films CAN be objectively good or bad, but it doesn’t overrule your subjective enjoyment. However, it is still possible for someone to make an incorrect statement about a movie, even if they claim it is their opinion. This happens quite often on online discussions.

    For example, the statement “I liked [movie]” can’t be criticised because it’s literally just someone saying they enjoyed a movie. There isn't anything else being expressed. It is a real opinion, and can’t be quantified.

    But, saying “[movie] was well-made” can be criticised, because it can be proven correct or incorrect based upon the movie succeeding or failing in certain ways. For example, if the movie screwed up in sound design, then that’s an obvious flaw. Or the movie could fail to portray a character, device, faction, etc Consistently. Often, people will explain why something in a movie is good, then, when someone else disagrees and tries to explain why, the first person insists it’s just their opinion. It is not an opinion. It is an attempt at stating a fact, and can be correct or incorrect.

    That’s the basics really. TL;DR, you can say you like a movie and not have to prove why, it’s just an opinion. But if you say a movie is good/bad, then you should be able to explain why that is.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Furnace

    Furnace Antroid at a picnic

    Jun 17, 2014
    Trophy Points:
    I think your arguments were well explained. The point about art not being outside of us is a good one. I suppose in that regard, a examination of the quality of an art piece would not be completely identical a logical or scientific endeavor in that respect. I wonder if part of the difficulty we've been working through is that "good" and "bad" in this context are so vaguely defined. Perhaps a more precise set of terms would be "effective" and "ineffective" with regard to the overall ends of the film at hand? I'm thinking of Aristotle's Poetics for this one. The philosopher doesn't define "good" and "bad" art, but he does lay out some general principles with regard to what makes for an effective comedy or tragedy, for instance, whether or not the character is portrayed sympathetically, etc. (Of course, since analysis of various techniques would be based on their past effectiveness in evoking certain reactions in audiences, the argument may verge on an appeal to a majority, so take that as you may.)
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2020
    • Like Like x 2
  4. adamid4

    adamid4 Well-Known Member

    Apr 2, 2010
    Trophy Points:
    All the movies were good, except Bumblebee, that was torture. That was fan service to G1, and it sucked. The Last Knight went off the rails a lot, but I was looking forward to the next movie.