Khuutra said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Khuutra said:
Some of you might say "but isn't quality subjective?". Yes and no. There are subjective opinions, but when enough gather, the fact that a lot of people have those opinions is an objective fact. So those turn into quality standards. When it comes to the middle, there is some disagreement (such as the notion of a "critic proof" film), but at both ends of the bell curve, the standards are clear. I reject this notion outright. The objective fact of a mean collection of subjective opinions does not equate to an objective standard of quality, especially since those objective facts of mean collections of subjective opinion do not remain the same over time. In point of fact, do you realize how universally panned Moby Dick was at the time of its publishing and for years afterward? |
That just proves time can change standards, not that standards are invalid at the moment. Even if Heavy Rain becomes greatdue to changing standards, it is still not great now.
|
It suggests that there are no particular objective standards of quality that different works attempt to fulfill, just expectations of the people who define a given dialogue. If you're going to pretend that there is an objective standard to whic Heavy Rain can be held (and found wanting) ten you can't acknowledge that this standard is itself malleable, almost mercurial, because that defies the idea of objectivity in said standard.
|
Well I hope we can agree to disagree, and leavt it at that.
But in terms of a mystery, it's objectively bad. The clues are poor, nonsencial, and it suffers from the idiot plot that turned me off of horror movies.
