Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 04:41:58 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Star Wars VIII: The Last Jedi

Started by momatt, January 23, 2017, 05:17:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

buzby

Quote from: Default to the negative on April 22, 2018, 04:53:07 PM
Those parochial Celts were making sounds of distress... but it turns out they were making a big fuss about nothing.

It's another joke about Skellig Island, isn't it?
Not to mention an 'it's like poetry, it rhymes' reference to the Ewok celebration in ROTJ

mothman

The final confrontation between Finn and Phasma, and Rey's time on Skellig, were so all over the place already, I'm left feeling the deleted scenes we've seen for both might actually have been improvements if left in.

Mister Six

Sorry to revive that horrible argument with Colacentral, but I just wanted to say that this is basically what I think:

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 16, 2018, 01:32:30 AM
There's a world of difference between purposefully doing something in an unusual, offbeat or experimental way and failing to achieve something in a recognisably standard way.  Either approach can be subjectively enjoyable but one can fail to achieve what one sets out to achieve, objectively.

...

Experimental cinema is just that; experimental.  It's purposefully breaking away from convention.  It is not the same as setting out to create a conventional piece of cinema and failing in an attempt to be conventional.  You can not hold them to the same standards.  Editing in an intentionally incoherent manner, within the realms of experimental cinema is entirely different to unintentionally incoherent editing, in a mainstream release.  They are different forms of film and as such, must be judged accordingly.

I'll grant you this much; it's a lot more difficult to be objectively critical of experimental cinema (if at all), than it is with popcorn entertainment but then again, that was never something I argued against.  This is a thread for a Star Wars movie; about as conventional as mainstream cinema gets.  I'm judging the movie by it's own standards, both objectively and subjectively.

To try and argue that Rian Johnson may have being treating his corporate movie, in which he was merely a director and writer for hire, as an experimental art piece, is absurd.  I know that you haven't watched the movie, so I'm not actually suggesting that this is the argument that you are putting forth, literally.  However, you are holding experimental cinema, to the same standard as focus tested entertainment and that is an incongruent notion.  You can not liken a Hollywood blockbuster, to independent and experimental cinema.  It's a different kettle of fish altogether and must be treated as such.  The gaps in logic in The Last Jedi are objectively poor, in spite of one's possible subjective tolerance towards them.

Aspects of a film can be objectively wrong and broken; subjective enjoyment of that film is a separate matter entirely. "It's art so it's all subjective" is nonsense.

colacentral

#2103
No, they can't.

Everything that you consider to be "wrong" and "broken" are subjective to your experience. There are things that 100% of people can agree on - they are still not scientifically proven facts, they are man-made paradigms of quality.

I didn't bother arguing any longer because St. Eddie didn't want to - I just wanted him to have the courtesy to respond to me rather than only replying to the people agreeing with him. I don't know why you'd want to bring this "horrible argument" up again just to essentially say "I agree with St. Eddie."

Kelvin

Quote from: Mister Six on April 29, 2018, 02:22:56 PM
Sorry to revive that horrible argument with Colacentral, but I just wanted to say that this is basically what I think:

Aspects of a film can be objectively wrong and broken; subjective enjoyment of that film is a separate matter entirely. "It's art so it's all subjective" is nonsense.

Even then, statements like 'the film is objectively shit' and 'the script is objectively shit' are far too be broad and feature far too many variables to be true. And both those statements were made. 

SavageHedgehog

I remember on another forum a poster, who I think had strong aspirations to be a scriptwriter or novelist themselves, was absolutely baffled that the majority of other posters there thought Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol was a good movie. They found a flaw in the internal logic of the villains' plan and just couldn't get past it. I think the rest of us just enjoyed the stunts, the style and to a lesser extent the characterisations and found the plot a serviceable clotheshorse to hang that all on, but for them the structural/logic flaw of the movie overwhelmed all else. (In fairness it's not a film which has loomed that large in the memory in the years since) I do believe there are matters of technical proficiency a film can "fail" at, I'm less certain scripts can be judged objectively and even less so a final film.

Zetetic

I think you can always push the problem back a bit and ask whether a work achieved this or that effect or response in its audience (whether it was intended to or not, by someone).

I think there are interesting objective questions along those lines.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

Does anyone really remember the plots of the Mission Impossible films? To me they're all "The one where he climbs a skyscraper" or "... he hangs onto a plane". Like an action packed episode of Friends.

greenman

Maybe the first one but nothing since then.

St_Eddie

Quote from: colacentral on April 29, 2018, 02:33:25 PM
I didn't bother arguing any longer because St. Eddie didn't want to - I just wanted him to have the courtesy to respond to me rather than only replying to the people agreeing with him. I don't know why you'd want to bring this "horrible argument" up again just to essentially say "I agree with St. Eddie."

As I already explained; I wasn't cherry picking my responses to only communicate with those who agreed with me.  I didn't want to engage with you any further because it was clear that to do so, would be a pointless endeavour in repetition.  None the less, I did reply to your post, when you pushed me to do so.

End of.

colacentral

#2110
Quote from: St_Eddie on April 29, 2018, 11:33:18 PMI did reply to your post, when you pushed me to do so.

Yeah, I know you did, I wasn't having a dig at that; it was for Mister Six's benefit.

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 29, 2018, 11:33:18 PM
As I already explained; I wasn't cherry picking my responses to only communicate with those who agreed with me.  I didn't want to engage with you any further because it was clear that to do so, would be a pointless endeavour in repetition.

It's one thing to not want to argue on that topic anymore, to find it boring or repetitious and move on - if that were the case I wouldn't take offence; but it's another thing to continue arguing on the same topic while ignoring the points made against you (known in the GB forum as "The Falcon Malteser Manoeuvre"). But we've been over that.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

It's okay you two. You're both wrong.

St_Eddie


Mister Six

Quote from: colacentral on April 29, 2018, 02:33:25 PM
Everything that you consider to be "wrong" and "broken" are subjective to your experience.

Nope.

QuoteI don't know why you'd want to bring this "horrible argument" up again just to essentially say "I agree with St. Eddie."

Because I agree with St Eddie.

St_Eddie

#2114
Quote from: colacentral on April 29, 2018, 11:41:03 PM
It's one thing to not want to argue on that topic anymore, to find it boring or repetitious and move on - if that were the case I wouldn't take offence; but it's another thing to continue arguing on the same topic while ignoring the points made against you (known in the GB forum as "The Falcon Malteser Manoeuvre"). But we've been over that.

I addressed your points at great length, to prove to you that I wasn't unable to refute your arguments, despite your insistence to the contrary and yet you persist in trotting out this tiresome line, over and over again and then trying to conclude it with 'we've been over that', as a means of having the last word on the matter.  Stop trying to rewrite the history of this thread.  Drop it and move on, if that's what you'd truly care to do.

Either way, quit attempting to infer that I refused to reply to your previous post when in actuality, I already did.

Quote from: colacentral on April 29, 2018, 11:41:03 PM
...it was for Mister Six's benefit.

Pull the other one, mate.  It's got bells on it.

Quote from: Mister Six on April 30, 2018, 02:53:05 AM
Because I agree with St Eddie.

Objectivity is possible within the critique of art...



"It's alright.  I know.  We know."

colacentral

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 30, 2018, 03:16:29 AM
Either way, quit attempting to infer that I refused to reply to your previous post when in actuality, I already did.

Yes, after I insisted on it, you bell.

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 30, 2018, 03:16:29 AM
Stop trying to rewrite the history of this thread



St_Eddie

Quote from: colacentral on April 30, 2018, 08:17:49 AM
Yes, after I insisted on it, you bell.

You really do think quite highly of yourself, don't you?  Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps others aren't beholden to reply to your posts, should they not be inclined to do so?  No, of course not because your thoughts are incredibly compelling and us less worthy mortals simply must respond to their Lord and Saviour, lest we suffer his wrath.

You crusty old waffle.

colacentral

Sorry, did you or did you not only reply after I insisted on it? You did, which makes your post above utterly disingenuous.

St_Eddie

Quote from: colacentral on April 30, 2018, 09:14:34 AM
Sorry, did you or did you not only reply after I insisted on it? You did, which makes your post above utterly disingenuous.

I replied because you accused me of not being able to refute your arguments.  I replied because I wasn't willing to allow you to wrongly make out that I had no rebuttal.  What is your point?  Do you want a medal for goading me into responding, even though I hadn't initially wanted to?  Do you want a round of applause?  Do you want me to suck you off with considerable vigour?  Are you really as waffly versatile as they say?

colacentral

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 30, 2018, 09:28:01 AM
What is your point?

I think you're making it abundantly clear for me.

colacentral

As a reminder, this is where you last left the objectivity argument:

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 16, 2018, 06:38:16 AM
Quote from: Monsieur Verdoux on April 16, 2018, 05:53:24 AM
uh sure

edit: no hang on, it's not about misusing the word, you're misapplying the very concept of 'objective analysis' because you're employing subjective criteria such as 'professionalism', presumption of authorial intent (and the value thereof) and putting importance on the way the piece conforms to a certain rubric of commercial filmmaking. these are all subjective because any art piece can exist and be thought of outside of the consideration of any of these things. these ideas are all dependent on a context that can be selectively applied or removed.

ideas about 'objectivity' simply don't apply to art in the same way that they would to other things. art can exist within context and without, with regard to authorial intent and with the intent completely disregarded. any rubric that you use to judge art is subjectively applied, because there is no fixed criteria with which to judge art. with no fixed criteria, there can be no objectivity when it comes to art. the criteria you are using may be a valid critical approach, but it is not objective.
You raise some valid points.  I can certainly see where you're coming from and to an extent, I can even agree but I still believe it possible to be objectively critical of art.  Our definitions differ and that's fine.  I've said my piece and I'm not going to back down because I fundamentally believe in my point of view on the matter, just as you and others believe in yours.

"You make some good points, but I'm right."

Quote from: Kelvin on April 29, 2018, 02:40:32 PM
Even then, statements like 'the film is objectively shit' and 'the script is objectively shit' are far too be broad and feature far too many variables to be true. And both those statements were made.

And you have to ask what the motive would be for such a statement.


Shit Good Nose

In a wide reaching poll I recently took, 100% of people confirmed that Last Jedi is objectively and scientifically shit.*




(* - based on 3 people polled, none of them scientists)

St_Eddie

It's pretty clear that you just like stirring the pot, @colacentral.  How many times must I reiterate;  I'm done with this topic.  I must have stated that several times already and yet, once again, you dredge it back up.

You may enjoy arguing with others for the sake of it but that's not how I roll.  Please don't communicate with me any further.  Ta.

colacentral

The grandstanding is largely one-sided, as your posts on this page show. You're throwing your toys out of the pram.

St_Eddie

Quote from: colacentral on April 30, 2018, 09:58:14 AM
The grandstanding is largely one-sided, as your posts on this page show. You're throwing your toys out of the pram.

Shoo, fly.  Don't bother me.

colacentral

Quote from: St_Eddie on April 12, 2018, 11:00:53 PM
Here's a great breakdown of just why this movie is objectively bad.  At one point, the fella explains why it's possible to be objectively critical of art.  I literally applauded that statement, as it's something that I've been saying for years.

[/reallifePartridge]

St_Eddie

#2126
Nice.  Yet again, dredging up a comment from weeks ago, for the express purpose of throwing some more shade my way.  You clearly enjoy winding people up and trying to goad them into reacting.  You realise that's not something that decent folk do, right?

Kelvin



Quote from: Mister Six on April 29, 2018, 02:22:56 PM
Sorry to revive that horrible argument with Colacentral, but

But you're not sorry at all, are you?

Oh yes, I've really been enjoying all of this discussion about THE NEW STAR WARS FILM.

You navel-gazing professional bores. 'Excuthe me, I have to win the ahguwment about thubjectivity!' Can we talk about Star Wars please.