Your Opinion Isn't (Always) Valid
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 фев 2025
- #transformers #writing #film
Let’s get something straight: not all opinions are valid. This might sound harsh, but it’s a fact. Saying “it’s just my opinion” doesn’t magically protect you from being wrong. An opinion isn’t some sacred, untouchable thing. It’s not like feelings, which are purely personal and can’t really be argued with. Opinions are statements-beliefs-based on information (or at least they should be). And if the information behind an opinion is wrong, then the opinion itself is wrong too.
Patreon: / membership
Merch: www.theseasemp...
Discord: / discord
As someone who's been called a fanboy for simply explaining why a criticism is wrong, and refusing to back down when the arguments are poor, this speaks to me.
Interesting
Did it involve defenses of the Pokémon Anime portrayals of Misty and Iris? I hope you don't mind me asking.
@@LittleAl016 Not a Pokemon fan.
It involves me defending Bioshock Infinite from various lies.
Defending RWBY (the show has loads of problems, but the later seasons show a stronger understanding of storytelling than the early ones).
And even TLOU II (it's not good, I don't like it, but I see some poor criticisms levied against it sometimes, but get called an "Abby fan" for simply saying, "Hey, this doesn't check out").
@@GameCat16 you're not alone. There's things i don't like or am not really into yet I won't stand for poor criticism or blatant misinformation regarding them.
Simply put, if you want to hate something, at least do it right!
As a Pokémon fan, defending the newer games shows me the worst of people. I criticize them becau I love them, but I don’t ruthlessly bash it into the ground because of performance issues. I’ve also been called a “corpo defender” because I like Pokémon and Nintendo games :|
I think the "you can't debunk a review" argument should also be discussed. way too many times have i heard reviewers say stuff like this. hell i think i remember a youtuber named RSG say in response to his terrible vids on invincible "I am not critiquing invincible i am reviewing it" has if you can't have objective criticisms in reviews.
You hit the nail on the head. If someone makes an objective claim, it can be debunked.
There have been a ton of films on RT that will have a 100% rating until some random person gives it a negative review and the points in the review don't even match the movie. They will be full of things like "This part doesn't make sense because I wasn't paying attention" or "This animated family movie isn't a serious live action drama."
Its the same thing with 'Joker 2019 is a ripoff of other crime movies', its a very disingenuous argument that relies on external knowledge that has nothing to do with the movie itself
I hate when people make those types of arguments. Does it share familiar concepts? Yes. Because they’re part of the same genre. That naturally happens. Why do they happen? Because they work well.
@Knowthename0000 Yup. It’s a lazy form of intellectualism. Because you can say that about almost any work. For example, Dune you could criticize it for being too similar to Lawrence of Arabia. Even though it’s very clear that Frank Hebert took inspiration from that story. Same with Joker with Taxi Driver.
A better argument would be saying if that piece did it better than you laid out your arguments why and we can have a discussion there. Specificity and details matter.
Also on a side note, your profile is awesome. Last Wish is amazing.
Black Swan (2010) is a better comparison to Joker 2019, than Taxi Driver. Like both these films are shockingly similar
I think one of the issues is that people tend dicuss art not as a subjective, but objective, while making subjective claims. I believe that we need better was to discuss art. One example i use is how i originally use to discuss shinji from evangelion. I use to called him a bad character becuase of how annoying i feel he is. The mistake i was making it that i was making an objective claim to my subjective opinion of him. The issue i was having was not that shinji was a bad character, but that i personally did not like shinji. So i started to change how i engage with this critisism not by talking about how i can improve it, or how good in an arbitrary metric i can mesure the piece. But what i take away from it.
Yeah that’s been my character arc too. I used to make broad sweeping claims based entirely on subjective thoughts (annoying, funny, boring, fun) rather than anything concrete, but thankfully I got enough pushback until I was forced to confront my own reasoning.
This is the way critique and discussion should be approached. A critics job isn't to try and fix a work. Their job is to explain the work to the audience based on their perspective that they formed when engaging with a work. A critic is supposed to give you their opinion, not try and force some objective thought on you disguised as their opinion.
As someone who has been doing my best to explain that the story of Cinderella is a beautiful story of having hope in the darkest of times, I feel like it’s so easy to make fun of fairytales because almost no one comes to their defense for accountability of bad opinions. You sir. Have earned your self a sub.
Cinderella is a great story, so I’m glad you defend it.
@@TheSEAempirethanks man, 95% of people who criticize it haven’t even sat through a watch of any of the movie interpretations much less are familiar with the source material.
You are absolutely spot on that sometimes it feels like people can just gaslight others into thinking a movie does something when it really doesn’t, and it’s super important to call out this disingenuous behavior.
SEA ngl, I'm recommending this video to the professors at the College I went to film school at. This really needs to be seen by the next generation of Film Makers and Critics. Well done man.
Thanks!
I genuinely appreciate how concise and to the point this feels, and all within ten minutes. Honestly, thank you.
Doug, you have been forgiven for your crimes. 🫡
I was able to understand At Worlds End just fine, Pirates team up togther to fight for they're freedom the characters and plots add to the reason set plot happens if you were to cut anything you would miss some of the contexts
And the characters we already know were built up for At Worlds End as well and it makes sense for them to fight for the freedom of Pirates they need help from other pirates which also leads to Barbossa needing Jacks help because he is one of the pirate lords!
Needless to say I watched the movie when I was 11 years old and got a good understanding on what its about just gotta pay attention and you'll know why these scenes are added until On Stranger Tides pretty much undid the progress of At Worlds End
*their freedom
I think the bigger point is the difference between a lazy bad faith review is different to an ill informed badly made review
True
“You can’t criticize me or you’re violating my right to free speech!”
My brother in Christ, criticism isn’t censorship; in a way, it’s the opposite.
Bingo. If everyone has the right to voice an opinion, so do people criticizing an opinion share that same right.
Basically your opinions and feelings are valid to yourself.
But once you start to build a critique out of them, be ready too at least have a valid point.
So happy to find a channel that respects AVATAR. There are so many amazing storytelling lessons to be found in those movies and people on the internet decided they were bad for it.
I agree. If an opinion is based on false information, then it's no longer an opinion. it's just you being wrong. Otherwise tho i think even the most controversial takes can be opinions, they can be something personal or unique
The degree to which wisdom grows corresponds to how much one can deconstruct their way of thinking by listening to others of a different wavelength challenge and oppose it.
This is why it's so crucial to hear opposites sides of your argument because you're able to form a better opinion that's grounded from your knowledge and the knowledge of others that don't agree with you.
I love cold hard truth videos that call out flawed ways of critical thinking.
I agree. Opinions can be wrong but preferences/feelings cant. If i say that i like the color red more than all of the other colors then you really can't argue that, thats just how i feel about something, but if i say that red is objectively better than all other colors, then that can 100% be argued because now your making a statement, about why this color is superior to the others, rather than just liking red.
This has now given me a more skeptical view of media critics.
7:34 Bingo hit the nail on the head. He ARE in that society where people, especially “film critics” (I use that term loosely for RUclipsrs/most gig journalists) just give uneducated and most bias takes on media. It ruins art.
I feel like people confuse opinions with statements. For example, "Avatar is just a white savior story" is a statement, and it's an objectively false statement. Statements can be objectively true or false, and require substantiated and sound evidence to back up said statement. An opinion, for example, is me saying something like, "I don't like Avatar, I feel the movie is boring, and it didn't click with me for this and that." That is based on how someone thinks and feels about something on a personal level, and that can neither be true nor false.
Sometimes, when people make sweeping statements like "It was too long", it's possible they had other problems they just couldn't articulate. Perhaps it was a lack of cause-and-effect momentum that made a story feel longer than it was, or the sort.
My Dad was among the crowd who believed Return of the King had "too many endings" back in the day. He only recently rewatched it and was puzzled at how he didn't find it egregious at all any more.
Maybe, back in '03, he just wasn't content spending that much time in a theater, waiting for a chance to pee, and pinned the blame on the movie's runtime.
5:55 This is so damn true. Not even just critics, a lot of ppl think this.
There are so many pieces of media that get way too much invalid hate that nobody seems to even try to defend. As an example, I know many of y'all are going to roll your eyes into the back your head when I say this, *Skibidi Toilet.* I'm being serious. Despite what many people think, Skibidi Toilet is more than dumb heads singing in toilets. It has a plot, it has lore, and its creator puts way too much effort into it than he probably should. The series obviously has lots of passion behind it, but the majority of the internet seems to agree that it is brainrotting nonsense targeted at Gen Alpha, when that is objectively and factually incorrect. Throughout the entirety of the internet, I have not seen one valid criticism for the web series. It's all just a bunch of people spouting brainrot brainrot brainrot, without bothering to actually watch what they're making fun of.
🔥✍
You are absolutely right. Remember your “relatability does not matter” video, well, i know this might seem off topic, but this needs to be said, in the context of bob’s burgers, gene is one of the most hated characters because he’s not relatable, your allowed to hate the character, but the reason for it isn’t valid. Can you make a video about the opinion being valid but the reason for it being invalid?
I think it would be a bit redundant for me to make a follow up to this video, since all it takes to have a good opinion is to have factual information and consistent standards applied, as with not letting feelings take over.
@ yeah but still it’s a issue that needs to be explored.
@ but i respect your decision
@@TheSEAempire But can you discuss people taking cartoons seriously?
Eh...as one of the people who didn't care for Avatar all that much...well I will fully acknowledge it was easy to understand, and straight forward. I just...didn't really feel anything from it? The most accurate way for me to say it was that on some level it felt...empty. At least the conflict did. I saw a lot of things happen, yet didn't really connect.
But other than that, your arguments are all valid and correct. Just because one doesn't like something doesn't automatically make it bad.
This video is great and this topic doesn't get discussed enough, over a decade now it feels like the majority of people follow the train of thought that if they dislike something it must be objectively bad and it's been getting worse recently so I'm happy to see it being called out.
I saw it so much last year with Starfield and it got so tiring.
As someone who has defended The Lost World Jurassic Park forever I've definitely seen alot of what is talked about in the video.
So what happens when everyone starts saying, "I just didn't like the movie."?
Then they don’t like the movie. They’re allowed to like or dislike whatever they want. But if someone makes an objective claim and it doesn’t hold up, then there’s an issue.
You don't know how long I waited for someone else to make a video on this.
I've been saying this for the longest time. Opinions are born out of personal perspective and perspective can be good or bad depending on how much access someone has to the greater picture or how much knowledge someone has of something.
I'm beyond sick and tired pf people commiting mistakes and then playing the "it's just my opinion" card.
These mofos know they have no excuse, that's exactly why the resort to calling shitty takes or statements an opinion. Cowards
I think we all agree Shrek is cinema's greatest achievement.
This is not opinion, it is objective fact
@@SM-th7pw Shrek brings everyone together.
So true
@@callmejacob3234 If you mean it’s impact on meme culture I guess you have a point
@@Jollyjose251 Shrek is the key to world peace.
This is gonna sound cliche but it’s true, we live in the age of easily offended people, people don’t wanna be challenged, they wanted to be babied and validated, that’s why we say “everything is subjective, there’s no right or wrong, it’s just your opinion”. Subjectivity is your enjoyment of something, you can find enjoyment in a bad movie, everyone has those guilty pleasures, but that personal enjoyment doesn’t make the movie objectively good. Media is all about entertainment, you can enjoy what you enjoy regardless of its objective quality, but you still need to understand the facts. I know i’ll be watching Micheal Bays Transformers til the day I die, however, you’ll never hear me make the claim that they are “good” movies, because that is simply not the case.
💯
Yeah transformers is one of my favorite movies but it is flawed
@@Warren-hy5rm theres quite a few movies that i like in the same way. the meg, dial of destiny etc i just find them enjoyable some times you want to watch a dumb monster movie with extinct sharks having miracously survived unchanged for millions of years
I agree that “subjectivity” is used too often to protect bad and uninformed opinions, but I don’t see how the underlying truth of art being a subjective experience where objectivity is only really formed by popular consensus is wrong.
Objectivity isn’t determined by popular consensus, that would be an appeal to popularity. Objectivity is being free from bias and looking at provable elements of something. Film is art, yes. But it’s also a collection of sciences and a form of communication, both of which are entirely objective in nature. The strictly artistic elements of a film, such as the musical style or color palette, are entirely subjective and designed to enforce the subjective experience for the viewer. But communicating ideas of characterization, worldbuilding, and thematic through-lines are entirely provable, and thus, objective.
Yeah.... haven't even watched the whole video and this goes straight to my favorites!!!
YOU SIR ARE A FREAKING LEGEND!!!!
So direct, so accurate and you used all the right words without being disrespectful! I am in awe!
I just don't know what to say you said everything there needed to be said!
I feel like the word "opinion" doesn't even sound like a word anymore
Whats equally annoying as "it's just my opinion" is people say "im just saying" when they have an argument or statement of some kind.
Opinions are only valid when its an informed one.
I had a conversation about this a few days ago, Its perfectly fine to have an opinion of your own but it isn't immune to criticism by nature of its being an opinion. You can absolutely challenge an opinion by questioning the reasoning behind that opinion
Basically, if you can't take it, then don't give it.
Bingo.
Based as fuck, I'm so sick of the shitty "uh I disagree cuz itz myyyyyy Opinion, it's allll subjective" It just reeks of somebody who has extremely low standards for Art and just want to be a Contrarian for the sake of it, they need to understand that liking a movie, doesn't mean the same as saying a movie is Good, similar to how not liking a movie doesn't mean its Bad, people need to stop being dishonest and toxicly positive and be level headed when it comes to movie quality. Also if they become a pain in the ass, tell them "If you can't accept criticism yourself, don't dish it out at somebody else".
Morality is not subjective. If it was then you could subjectively say that you think Hitler was right and no one should have anything against that because "It's just an opinion". No one says that Hitler was right but some could say he is justified. These concepts arent the same. I recommend a video about objective morality called: Star wars philosophy. Good is just a point of view? it uses star wars to show that morality is objective. If you watch it share your thoughts down below.
I'd just be careful about acting like my deeper look at an artwork means nobody can effectively contest what I'm saying
Anybody can contest anything, but it’s a matter of how solid their argumentation is.
in all fairness it's a pretty common script to fall into
I get this whenever I see reactions to Final Fantasy XIV: Stormblood, and it's mainly by people that simply didn't understand the story being told and just didn't read dialogue. They usually say that certain quests should have been cut, especially the one where you go and collect dung on the Azim Steppe. This quest gets particular scorn from such people who call it all "pointless fetch quests" even though it serves two very clear purposes: 1. worldbuilding, and getting you acquainted with the Mol tribe and their way of life, and 2. the cutscenes during that quest has one of the main characters of the expansion (who also gets unfairly lampooned) having to actually explain the concept of nationhood to some nomadic children in her own words, which actually shows a measure of growth for her because she was always the brawn but never the brain (and it's important for her in becoming a leader). There's so many other things from that expansion too but I've heard people try to call it objectively bad and then bring up weird esoteric writing theories they probably copy-pasted from some university lecturer or something and didn't understand because they never actually explain them.
The opinion of illiterates on writing is less than worthless.
As someone who's always believe that story telling is equally objective as it is subjective, hearing someone else echo the sentiment that "just because you don't like it doesn't mean its bad" and visa versa has gonest been misic to ky ears. Its why when people talk about certain anime like Demon Slayer or Attack on Titan (if someone says the former is a good show and say the latter is a bad show) I automatically have to question their ability to discern what is objectively good and bad writing.
I personally don't like demon slayer. i do like atteck on Titan, tho
While I agree with your general sentiments towards the subject matter, I really, and I mean really, cannot shake off this weird vibe you ended up showing halfway through the vid (the I'm the best critic, I did it thoroughly, which makes me right and I cannot be questioned, which is the tone you've been giving me, a guy with zero attachment to your videos and first time seeing your content).
I just hope you know that you yourself are very much fileable and capable of being called out, no matter how deep the criticism or the calculations (like for example, the Manhattan project, scientists on that project did all sorts of deep form calculations to make their atomic bombs, but that wasn't going to ever stop people calling them monsters, and I don't think you're free from this, just because you do "deeper" levels of criticism).
Other than that, good video!, and I'm glad someone actually has the balls to talk about this subject that barely anyone ever wants to bring up.
I’ll openly invite criticism of my stances, rest assured. My point wasn’t that I’m perfect or anything, but the fact that I hold myself to higher standards than most creators, and I hope others hold themselves to some level of standards as well for the sake of inspiring fruitful discussions.
@@TheSEAempire Thank you for acknowledging my vibe from earlier. I just wanted to be sure if it was a one off instance vibe, or something else, but you cleared that up for me!.
🫡
Nice video. However, morality is not relative. Morality is based on objective truths, things that we can observe and interpret.
Else, why would we see certain actions as inherently evil?
What makes them inherently evil?
@TheSEAempire For example, "What makes a genocide evil?" The objective truth that all human beings are valuable no matter what ethnicity they are. No one could argue against that because we all can see and feel that it's wrong. Some people say it's human conscience, some (like myself, full discloser) believe it is the Spirit of God. Either way, it remains objective. Therefore, why would we call morality relative in spite of the evidences? Thanks for responding, by the way.
Well as much as I’d love to agree that genocide is objectively evil, I can’t. For something to be objective it would have to be either provable or based on observable reality. The sun is objectively a star because every aspect of its existence is shared with other celestial bodies in the universe that are also classified as stars. And I fully respect your beliefs, but I’m not religious. Just in the way that I can’t prove that there isn’t a god, you can’t prove that there is one. In reality any judgements of morality are based on what we believe, as you stated you believe it’s the spirit of God. But the very fact that we’re discussing *anything* on the basis of belief inherently makes it subjective. If we got hit by an asteroid tomorrow, that wouldn’t be evil. That wouldn’t be the fault of anyone. Morals don’t apply to the nature of reality, we just use them to help us understand the world and have civility.
@@TheSEAempire The main point I was making wasn't about belief. It was about prove-able objective truth. Hear me out on a thought exercise where we may explore some truths.
--Does the sun exist in our galaxy?
I’ll bite. Yes, the sun exists in our galaxy.
True, we understand. But don’t worry, some of the opinions could be wrong, but some did it rightfully. Don’t worry, Sometimes movies and tv shows being hated being loved by someone is somewhat understandable at times like Stars Wars, Cars franchise like Cars 2 and Cars 3, Planes, Turbo, Alvin and The Chipmunks. But don’t worry, we all know is tricky sometimes but still finding sometimes opinions could fix the movie problems. Tell me, if I’m right and wrong? I’m sorry.
You, sir, are the type of person who redeems my hope in humanity
🫡
I'm working on a project to do with movies and this video opened my mind and every time I put a movie on the list I really think about where it should go
On James Cameron's Avatar: The channel Pilgrims Pass has a video comparing it to Princess Mononoke and which one is the better environmentalist story. Spoilers:
He prefers Princess Mononoke.
I mean if he prefers it, fair enough. I haven’t seen Princess Mononoke so I can’t make any claims of quality, but I can at least say Avatar is still pretty excellent.
@@TheSEAempire It's excellent, I highly recommend.
@@TheSEAempireThe people trash on the Avatar movies because they are disappointed by James Cameron that he could have done better.
Terminator 1, 2, Aliens worked because the story was the main focus and special effects are tools in the story. It is the opposite for the Avatar movies.
The focus of the Avatar were special effects and the story was just a tool for the special effects.
Terminator and Aliens had deeper themes and more complex characters. While everything in Avatar is just black and white.
I think people are just disappointed in James Cameron fails to recapture the same kind of sci-fi appeal he did with the first two Terminators and Aliens.
Does it need to be more complex? Again, nothing in inherently better if it’s more complex/original. It’s about execution, and Avatar is borderline flawless in narrative execution.
Avatar has an infantile view on environmentalism while Princess Mononoke is more grounded and real
B-But if I have to justify my opinions, how can I push out endless amounts of slop content?
So true!
I have a very close friend who i care about to bits, we were talking about into the spider verse and her criticism was "I was watching the whole movie going 'wheres the story?' "
That just
It was so baffling that i had no response AGHHHH
It’s shit like that which drives me up the wall. Like… you can’t just say shit and expect everybody respects it when it doesn’t make any sense 💀
I did the thing suggested in your video and held her accountable for that opinion later, with discussion she eventually realised the plot was fine and that she just didn't relate to the struggle and arc of miles Morales grappling with anxiety and expectations, so the movie didn't connect/click with her... HEALTHY FILM DISCUSSION!
I dont dislike Avatar because its "problematic" I dislike it because I find it boring, forgettable and cliche with the majority of the interesting lore of the world never making it into the actual movies. Whenever I talk to people irl about the movie these seem to be their main cricisms as well. I unironically cannot remember a single thing about that movie outside of the dragon things. Whenever someone Ive spoken to has brought up its similarity to Dances with Wolves or Pocahontas its not because its offensive, its because these are examples of stories that are very similar as a way of supporting the argument that Avatar is a very surface level criticism of colonialism that has nothing new to say. Its been done before, Avatar just has prettier graphics.
However, I dont think Avatar is a bad movie. I base whether a movie is good or not on whether it achieved what it set out to achieve. Avatar set out to have a simple story with a simple message that has been done before but is still a valid message. In that I think avatar is a good movie, just not one I enjoy.
And does that make it of lesser quality? You personally, along with others, don't remember character names and find it cliche. That is valid. But I draw the line when we attribute entirely subjective phenomenon as problems with a film. And even if it's been done before, does it matter? Like if you showed Avatar to someone who hasn't seen Dances with Wolves or Pocahontas, they wouldn't have the same experience you just described, so it's not much of an argument outside of the individual. And I think the Dances with Wolves argument is cringe, my buddy made a great video explaining why it's not accurate: ruclips.net/video/W8sgI3bK0Ag/видео.htmlsi=dJai3VILSScOkDLH
@@TheSEAempireplease read the edit. I never said that Avatar was a bad movie. I said that I dislike it.
Fair enough, I dig it
@@TheSEAempireI probably am not going to watch that video. Why do you think pointing out the fact that Avatar is a cliche story and using Dances with Wolves as an example of another story with said clichés in it is cringe?
Because it ignores the nuances between each story. Aside from the obvious differences in setting, genre, and worldbuilding rules, there are fundamental differences in characterization that don’t fit the argument of “it’s just like Dances with Wolves”. It’s on a level that, if applied consistently with other films, would make “Joker is just Taxi Driver”, “Dune is just Star Wars”, and “Taken is just Finding Nemo” valid arguments. They have shared elements, as all stories made by humans do. Again if we show Avatar to people who haven’t seen Pocahontas or Dances with Wolves, the experience you had wouldn’t be applicable to that person.
An opinion being invalid and an opinion being valid, just destroys the whole point of an opinion. You can agree or disagree with someone’s opinion and notice the flaws of them, but that doesn’t make it valid or invalid. You’re opinion can be right or wrong. Do you notice the pattern here
And what if an opinion is entirely predicated on falsehoods?
the point of an opinion is by having a personal perspective. So If someone may not or may agree with someone else’s opinion, that means that someone has a has a different perspective than the other person. If that makes any sense
@TheSEAempire its a opinion not a fact now if someone stated it as a fact that a different story now.
None of this makes any sense. If I said “this film is bad because-“ that would be an opinion stating a claimed fact. Opinions and facts aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Facts are, well, facts, and opinions are personal responses to facts. Again, if the information someone bases an opinion off of is factually incorrect, their opinion is flat out incorrect as well.
@@TheSEAempire Depends entirely on how that sentence ends:
"This film is bad because it's too long" is a subjective opinion.
"This film is 3 hours long" is a factual statement.
"This film is bad because it's 3 hours long" is subjective opinion of a fact.
"This film is bad because it's 3 hours long and that's too long" is a subjective argument built around a subjective opinion about a fact.
You can clearly have opinions that are not based in facts, as in the first example. And even in the latter examples, even if it turns out that the fact is wrong, it doesn't necessarily negate the opinion. Especially the last statement, as the core issue is that the film is too long and the actual exact length is irrelevant.
how to have a twitter argument 101
Bro fell off
So true 😔
I do agree with the idea that we should challenge people to elaborate on why they feel a certain way about something and when they make a bold statement, but I fundamentally disagree with the idea that art can be objectively, good or bad.
Art in general is a Rorschach test. When someone comes to me personally and says that a game or movie I like is objectively bad for XYZ, My first gut reaction is often to say “who are you to decide that?”
Yes, it is important that we should have some sort of understanding for why you came to that conclusion, but I don’t think it’s right to say that a piece of art is objectively bad because then it alienates people who disagree with that opinion.
I always found it annoying whenever someone would come at me and say “it’s OK to like bad movies” or “everybody has a guilty pleasure” because what if I don’t see it as a guilty pleasure? what if I see them as genuinely good works of art? does that suddenly make me delusional? If yes, I’d rather remain in my dreamworld personally.
I feel like you only makes sense to be objective about something when you are presenting evidence to back up your subjective argument, because in that case, the validity of your claim is being tested by what actually happens in the source material.
But when it comes to the quality of the film or piece of media, that is something to me that is ultimately subjective.
What’s the point of disagreeing or having discussion if the art is “objectively bad”? That’s mainly the big problem we have with that word because it waters down the whole idea of discussing and agreeing to disagree.
What makes film exclusively an art?
@@TheSEAempire I think what makes it an art because they are bold expressions of ones feelings and experiences put to film, script, etc.
Lord of the rings, for instance, which I watched very recently aside from being a grand story of fantasy, corruption, and peril, it’s also a story about people trying to overcome the trauma of war and sticking together at their lowest moments, as well as the people who will take advantage of that along with the people who are much more traumatized and too far gone than others.
Another one I could give would be something like across the spider verse. A superhero film about a young hero, proving that he deserves a seat at the table, but others could also pull from its discussion on how we treat people of younger generations telling them they just have to suck it up because that’s how things work whereas the younger people to fight back and change.
I’m sure there are some who agree with how I view those films, some who disagree, but those are my own interpretations
Of course, when it comes to art, there are many different techniques that are applied to enhance the experience such as unique camera angles, writing clever dialogue, sound design, acting choices, etc. But I find even in my own experiences, taking film class in college, A lot of these techniques are varied in reaction. Some tricks work, others don’t, and sometimes you gotta break the rules.
To give an example of this, I despise the Dutch angle because I feel like went over used. It is a very obnoxious camera angle that feels the need to remind me that something is off, but when most of the movie uses it, it pulls me out of the film. However, I find when you rarely use it, it can be really effective.
Movies in a lot of ways can be an illusion. Some people are going to be sucked out of that illusion when certain things happen while others are still invested in it. In the same way, someone’s art style in a comic book can be appealing to a lot of people, but boring to others.
Much like I said earlier art is a Rorschach test, film is the same way.
Apologies if this answered seem very long-winded compared to my previous one, I get very passionate about stuff like this.
Well I work in film, typically pre-production. So I’m one of the people who helps out with getting things off the ground. I love doing it, and I totally see where you’re coming from, from an external view. But in reality there are any number of provable elements of film that go beyond simply being artistic and designed to create certain feelings.
Writing for example is almost entirely objective. Writing is the art of communicating ideas, and there are provable ways to communicate ideas effectively. Consistency in how the information is conveyed, logical backing behind character psychology, establishing cohesive worldbuilding, etc.
Sure they *can* be seen entirely subjectively, they’re still things that can be proven with evidence from the text. Otherwise, why would we even have deeper discussions of media and writing if it all amounted to *just* how an audience member felt? I think it’s a bit of a disservice to film as a medium to try and label it as just art, it’s so much more than that and has many more objectives than to just be a purely engaging emotional experience.
I think this might be a case of clashing ideologies because I don’t agree with that personally. And to be honest, I don’t think I ever will.
Agree to disagree I guess
From the point of view of skepticism, any opinion is the same, whether they are important or not, is a third matter
One of the most annoying examples of this came to me by way of Rage-A-Holic. The guys spent a legit stupid amount of time bashing the "Crap CGI" of Blade Runner 2049. I happen to know how much insane set building, model-making and traditional movie-magic went into that project. 45 minutes of some dipshit wearing sunglasses inside and it's entirely based on a bunk starting point.
So, I wrote him off, since, he can't properly research a film. Yet, I have explained this to people and had them look at me like I'm a fool for not taking that sort of thing with a grain of salt and just blindly consuming his takes anyway. That reaction from his fanbase doesn't make me wrong in believing he's a twit who can't be bothered to look into the multitude of videos released to this very platform covering the subject.
I get he's popular. Popularity doesn't make someone well researched, smart or worth wasting time on.
It's okay to have an opinion, however you have make sure it's a well crafted one.
A part of me thinks that this vid is true bc we live in a world that is more divided than ever. Those who defend certain media, they don't use very good excuses nowadays. And those who criticize media, they don't use that much valid points anymore. Me, I decide to use valid points as to why I stand by my opinion while also respecting other people's opinions. For example, I don't hate Avatar, I like the cinematography. I just think that the story could be better. Still, I don't think the story is bad, I just feel like it has some issues. But that's just how I personally feel about it and if anyone feels different, that's fine.
"DEBATE ME BRO"
Dog you clicked on a video you clearly didn’t agree with at the outset. The point I made was “if you can’t take the heat, don’t play with fire.”
Q.E.D. If you don’t want to debate someone, don’t start a debate!
It is. Unless it’s anyone else’s - then this video applies.
_retreats into my room_
2:23 that’s what I love about Pirates at World’s End. It’s a movie about character motivation. I didn’t enjoy Avatar though cause it’s just boring. It takes a controversial and interesting problem and just strawmans one side of the problem. I just think theirs other pieces of media that deals with industrialization vs environmentalism
It doesn’t strawman the side of industrialism, it accurately portrays it’s own story. It has environmentalist themes, but it IS a story beyond that which does need stakes and characters that exist cohesively in-universe.
To be fair, i really liked James Cameron's Avatar, but i didn't think it needed a sequel, which i haven't seen yet, so i can't criticize it. My biggest issue with the movie is the logistics of it. What make Unobtainium so special. It's a room temperature superconductor, which makes long distance space flight cheaper and more viable. Okay, but how is it only on Pandora? Well, look at Pandora, in general. It's a habitable moon of a gas giant, that lies about 7 or 8 light years away from Earth.
So my question is, why that one element is found on just one moon of a gas giant? Why wouldn't it be found on other moons of that same planet? Or better yet, why wouldn't it be found on the moons of Jupiter, or Saturn, which are far closer to Earth?
Also, i just found your channel, and you do a great job dissecting your information for idiots like me, so thank you!
I’d just infer that it’s in higher quantities on Pandora. Like if humanity knows of its existence it must exist elsewhere, but Pandora must just have disproportionately more.
1:34 hot take i think the movie should have been longer. I wanted more time in the pirate fortress and a bigger final battle with the rest of the fleet.
Thank you I think I needed to hear this
I honestly agree with you. I mean when I watch a movie and than write a genuine review on fb of what I thought about the movie. For Gore Verbinski's epic Pirates I never cared about the length of time or being overly converluded. I pay attention to the plots, stories, character development from start to finish. If I don't like something and thinking how I would improve about a movie or it's character(s) for example in dead men tell no tales rather than Salazar just hating Jack why not have him accusing him for the death of his son and wants revenge. My opinion is valid unlike Peggy Hill or Doug Walker's awful opinions proving they're right. Another example in Star Trek The Motion Picture after the movie came out in December 1979 up until than people criticize they're opinions of being the "motionless picture or slow moving picture" because it lacked action. For me and others who love it. Great musical score, plot and store, seeing the refit, re introduction of the characters.
Nope, you're just a hater who can't stand it when other ppl have different opinions. I will now proceed to cope and seethe over you having different opinions than mine.
Oh, and um um uhhh you just hate fun. I win. Goodbye.
Truth. 😎
@@thejardmantle Cars on the Road is trash btw
Better than Chainsaw Mid@@TK-9851
Finally! Someone can see the merit in Avatar. I'm really tired of the arguments people give as to why its "horrible". Its a GREAT movie and I'm tired of pretending that it's not.
(8:34) In what way can filmmakers not predict what tropes are going to be recognized by audience members? Filmmakers should be familiar with the history of film and tropes that have been overdone. That's not to say that you can't pay homage to past films, but there's a difference between paying homage and just doing tropes at face value. To be clear, I've only seen Avatar once. So, I can't really speak on that, but are we not allowed to criticize Marvel for recycling the same super hero tropes over and over again? Is Gus Van Sant's shot for shot remake of Psycho "objectively" as good as the original? I agree that an original plot isn't always good (and I generally agree with the point of the video), but context matters.
In what way can somebody measure the usage of a trope? Measurability is the cornerstone of objectivity. Some tropes are exclusively Western in nature, some are byproducts of certain types of stories, some are intentionally placed, and some are subverted. People who watch more films will naturally recognize tropes more frequently, so would that be a fault of the filmmakers if they don’t expect their audience to watch hundreds of films a year? With Marvel I can get it, since it’s all the same studio that insist on having their films share a continuity, but even then I wouldn’t make any claims of quality based on said tropes.
@@TheSEAempire I mean theoretically you could measure the usage of a trope if you really wanted to, but I don't think it has to be that exhaustive. I think it's more about knowing your audience. To keep going with the Marvel example, it's reasonable to assume that their fans have seen the previous Marvel installments. So, I think it's totally valid for fans to ask for something different when they feel like they are seeing the same tropes over and over again. Again, not that originality is always better, but tropes can be overdone especially if they are done a lot in quick succession (and in the same franchise).
Fair enough
@@TheSEAempire Always funny to dunk on Red Letter Media and Nostalgia Critic though
This makes too much sense so you must be wrong
6:26 nice foreshadowing
I hope zootopia don't use dirty cop trope.
Sometimes people tell me my opinions aren’t valid when I say I didn’t like Strange World or Turning Red since to me, it is just a hollow shell of what Disney used to be.
If other people like it, I don’t judge them. I just prefer watching Aladdin or the original Lion King for a good Disney movie.
That's just your opinion though and in my opinion our opinions can be different and that's ok
Opinionception
@@TheSEAempire🤓🤓🤓
Opinions are like…….well………you know lol.
Another great video as usual. Keep up the amazing work. I say a lot of the invalid opinions come from those who don’t want to be specific and clear when it comes to their criticisms or just bad reasoning. For the former, you need to quantify your reasonings why something is bad. For example, The Last Jedi sucks because hyperspace ramming is a thing that completely neutered space combat and isn’t well explained. And took episode nine to do a retcon( which is funnier because it made that scene worse). That I can easily back. Whereas if someone said TLJ sucked because it says capitalism is bad or too many women in it is stupid. Having a movie comment on a political or social aspect isn’t bad provided, it’s leveraged well in the story. Case in point, the scene where Finn sees DJ selling ships to both sides could have been a good moment for him to reflect on his own choices and role of the galaxy. But nope; it’s just dropped there and he still chooses the resistance. We don’t even get a reason or exploration. It just happens.
That’s the kind of lazy BS that leads to the quality of art declining. Know what you’re talking about. If you don’t like a movie? Fair enough. But don’t make statements like a movie is good or bad if you cannot back it up.
Thank you for sharing your opinion
In my opinion the imperium of man from warhammer 40k can still kick the Na'vi arse and thats that come my brothers we found a heretic
💀
@TheSEAempire do you like warhammer 40k
Nah I’ve never played it.
@TheSEAempire my opinions are I wish the star wars sequel trilogy was written better I don't like the last of us video games I love the environment of both avatar movies including the new game but I think that the characters including the main are bland and forgettable especially the story too
I don’t find them bland nor forgettable.
Great Stuff!
While I can understand your points, I personally just don't see it as a big deal.
Depends on the situation. Everything I discussed in this video can apply to much larger concepts like politics or social issues, but I only discussed it from the angle of film criticism since that’s an area I have more experience in. And even then, for people who *do* value conversations of filmmaking, it’s a bit of a big deal to many of us.
@TheSEAempire I understand that and hold no disregard or disagreement towards any of it, but in the current landscape of things and how the internet is right now, I usually don't tend to have it be such a heavy thing to put too much energy into or get too critical over. At the end of the day, opinions we often criticise or at the very least disagree with *a lot* will remain with the people who have them even if one keeps hitting on that nail, and it's best not to dwell so heavily into that as it can become quite overwhelming to some. I agree with many of your points surrounding this from a film-making and critical perspective and your sentiments are in the right place, but to me I just don't treat it as a big thing because I know people *will* just go and do their own thing when it comes to their thoughts and how they express them, it's been that way online for quite a while and the best you could do is just not partake on that way of opinionating. Though that's just how I see it, I don't think the way you view it is wrong at all and the video shows you hold these values at a high standard so very good on you *and* the many others that follow the same way.
@@TheSEAempire Also while I'm at it, I wanted to praise you for the Transformers One video you made a while back. It makes me quite happy to see people giving it the praise it deserves as a whole and the analysis you made of the scenes and buildup was very well made, and for that I must sincerely thank you. I know it's off topic, especially for *this* video, but it's something I wanted to say.
The only valid opinions are mine.
All others are wrong because I said so.
So true!
I think that when someone says a fictional work or a non fictional work is problematic, they need to cite why they found it problematic for them and realize that it may not hold true for everyone in general. However, I think every piece of fiction has problematic elements in them, because they are written and produced by imperfect human beings.
As a Christian, I consider Slasher films to be a glorification of violence, but you know what? You could throw the same stones at my favorite genre of fiction in cinema-the superhero genre. It, too, can be seen as a glorification of violence. If someone were to say to me that he doesn't see the superhero genre as a valid art form, I would not dispute him, because, despite my loving the genre, maybe he has some valid point.
I loved Josh Whedon's version of The Justice League movie, but I will say that it is a popcorn movie and the pacing is flawed and all over the place, however, that does not mean the film has no merit. It is pure popcorn fun and I see no harm in that. I prefer it over the Snyder cut, ahltough I actially like the Snyder cut as well.
And I can understand the criticisms the Snyder movies get. Yes, they can be grim and yes, his take on Superman is less hopeful than Christopher Reeve's interpretation My one critque of SNyder's take on Superman is how he was mourned after he had died when he had not been seen as the ideal gero prior to his death, but you know what? I understand that I could be wrong in that opinion. I think that Snyder was going to get around to a more hopeful and idealistic Superman. he doesn't strike me as a director who is grim for teh sake of grim alone.
As for a work having cliched plot points, I think depends on what you mean by cliched. That can vary from one person to another. As a writer myself, I believe I should be striving to be as a original as possible, but if I have one element in my work that is a cliche, does that mean the entire piece is bad and without merit? I don't think so.
I was thinking about my first novel and how I used the word "Fat" to excess and I know that I focused way too much on my main character's obesity. Now, while writing the sequels and prequels, I am trying to focus more on the behaviors of my anti-hero/anti-villain instead of dwelling on the fact that he is obese, if that makes any sense. But that doesn't mean that I think my first novel is the worst thing ever written. I see it as a proving ground to see what would work and what would not work.
I really think if you want to say something is problematic, then you need to back it up with valid reasons why you found the work to be problematic for YOU, not for everyone else. I find slasher films to be bad because I personally feel that they glorify violence, but if you were to tell me that you find them to be a catharsis of sort, I would not dispute you. I would still hold to my opinion, but I would not tear you down because you have a different viewpoint.
Also, we argue our preferences as if they are opinions. A preference is not an opinion. You can say that you like Coca-Cola and think it's the best drink ever, but that's a preference, not an opinion. An opinion is : "I think that Snyder doesn't understand Superman because he makes him less the ideal hero than the way the hero is generally portrayed." Or, "Mr. Clark seemed to be angry because of the shouting he did at the meeting." But that opinion could be wrong as he could have been shouting for emphasis and not out of anger.
And it is sometimes necessary to have familiar plot points in film and story. Critics need to keep that in mind.
Even feelings aren’t always valid. The word for invalid feelings is “delusion”
I recently watched the first season of Invincible. I thought it was alright. Didn’t love it or hate it, but it was pretty over hyped. Seemed like a pretty standard high school superhero story just with more gore.
If I had to express any major issues I had, one of them would be how poorly the romantic relationships are written. Like the one between the main character and the non super powered girl. She gets upset with him even though she says she figured it out before he decided to reveal who he was and didn’t tell him, but still acts upset with him for some reason.
Then you have the girl in pink and knock-off Gambit. They just didn’t display much chemistry when they were on screen together.
Another gripe I have is that the big twist at the end was underwhelming.
I will say even huge fans of the show agree some of the romantic relationships weren't great.
The Pokemon Community has this problem with opinions this video needs it.
4:56 6:25 they’re reviews are for humor.
Yes. And?
True but that’s just my opinion
💀
Would someone be objectively wrong if they said "attack on Titan promotes fascism".
I haven’t seen it, but if they did they should be pressed on why they think that.
@TheSEAempire Attack on Titan is a brutal battlefield. I would be exceedingly fascinated to see your take on it. Because aot needs more reviewers like you.
Maybe someday. I’m too busy to get into a TV series these days, however.
@TheSEAempire With all due respect, isn't your job to review media?
I disagree, but I still respect the fact that you're right. 😁
While I agree with the majority of what you're saying, the one thing I disagree with is that qualitative evaluation of art is objective; this is more implied than directly stated, though I do believe you might have said it more directly in another video. Yes, there are objective elements to qualitative assessments, like 'this guy said this' and 'this happened at this point in the story'. A list of dry facts, basically. Deriving meaning from them and their interaction within the work's larger context is completely subjective, however. There is some cold hard truth to the individual working bits, but not to the ultimate evaluation of art.
So would Spider-Man being an abhorant white supremacist not be objectively out of character with the established information?
@@TheSEAempire Yes, it would objectively be out of character for that... character based on the pre-established work he was part of, but the artistic evaluation of the work that would appear in would still be subjective, even if 99% of us would say it's a terrible piece of work. An artistic piece is not a microwave or lawn mower, where we can objectively evaluate how good it is. Personally, I think if we somehow managed to make it so, it would not only devolve art and the discussion around art: it would stop being art. Yes, the objective facts should play a part in the evaluation, but the evaluation of art itself is always subjective. Imo, that makes it more interesting to talk about, not less.
You know film isn’t just art, right? Writing itself is a form of communication, something that CAN be discussed and critiqued objectively. Honestly it devalues film *more* to claim it’s just art. Both forms of discussion can exist, but they should not be conflated.
Wait zootropolis was racist WHEN
2016.
Good video my dude
Can you explain the Zootopia point to me? Cause I really like that movie, and I wanna see if I'm missing something.
I made a video explaining how it’s a bad film a while ago. My friends and I went in-detail discussing how it doesn’t work on any objective level.
@TheSEAempire But how though?
I made an hour long video explaining it, I ain’t repeating it here. You can watch it if you want.
I wish the right and gamers understood this. Their hypocritical opinions will always be invalid.
Ah yes, because the left has never had opinions that are just as hypocritical. Never mind the fact that there are left minded groups that claim to be for inclusivity and have plainly stated they don't include certain people because of things outside that person's control. Sweet Baby Inc being the most infamous example.
No need to get political
I’m going to disagree with one element here.
The criticism of “a film is too long” need not say “this scene is not needed”. A scene may be utterly essential to explain a plot, but the movie may indeed in aggregate be too long for you to enjoy.
I think the film “Dune Part 2” is too long. This is not due to any specific scene that should be removed. For me it was that the speed at which the story unfolded made it more difficult for me to engage with it. Each scene on its own was necessary for the story to unfold as it did, and in isolation I found them all to work. But the total length meant that by the end of the story I was mentally too tired to fully engage.
We’re I pressed I might suggest that my solution would be to have 3 films instead of 2, and include more total content but shorter films. Or to mildly trim various scenes to speed them up (such as the first worm ride where, with the length of the scene and the low visibility during it, I was not engaged enough to enjoy it).
That said I agree with much of the post. I’ll also say that 2 people can subjectively like or dislike something whilst agreeing on all the facts. I did not like Avatar as I did not find the visuals entertaining to watch, the action engaging, or the characters ones I was invested in. This is not an objective thing though but my reaction to the film.
In short, you should be able to explain your subjective opinion on if a film is “good” based on objective things, but recognising that other people may not agree with the subjective bit. An unexplained plot element is a plot hole. Whether this is good or bad for a story is an opinion.
Too long to enjoy ≠ objectively too long. Anything tied to enjoyment or investment cannot be used as reasoning for an objective claim.
@ indeed I agree. Although unless we are talking about objectively measurable things (such as coherence of a plot, existence of a theme and so on) then any discussion of film or really any media must become subjective.
I would compare it to a painting. You can objectively assess whether or not a painter was skilful in creating the image, but you cannot make any objective statement on if the art is “good”.
But most media discussion is about trying to explain, in one way or another, if you think a thing is good and then spelling out why, ideally by citing objectively true things about the film or explaining how your personal tastes line up. I have long held the mark of a very good film critic is that they are capable of describing in perfect detail why they think a film as poor, but with enough honesty that you know if you would like it yourself, once you account for differences in taste.
My main point though was not that Dune is too long (as any statement of that is subjective), but to say my feeing that it was (and just to note I have found measurably longer movies more engaging) is not based on (for example) this or that scene being unnecessary to the plot. It was the aggregate effect that did it for me. In my mind this is a valid thing to say as I am explaining why I personally did not like an aspect of the film.
The objective bit may be saying that many scenes occur at a measured and deliberate pace, intending to evoke a sense of grandeur to the events and allow tension to build. Whether you think this works on a scene by scene basis, and separately for the film as a whole, is the subjective part.
We can agree on the objective element of the film (it has a specific pacing) but disagree on the subjective element (is this good or not)
This is the last comment I'm writing in this video
Consider this video that can apply to all media discourse not just movie
I'm done with people who say "it just my opinion" because in pokemon there is a design that i think is a good design but some people just want out there making it the worst design because it doesn't feel like a monster.
Not all assertions are well informed. Yet some are. How else could they be valid? ;)
Avatar is bad because I hate the color blue
I will add something to this video because not only opinions can cause false information people hold on meat ride something that they like way too hard create this is the best character in the movie even though that's their opinion like for real people need to let it go sometimes
Also a lot of people in this comment section are downright bad like no he's right.
I agree with this 100% Avatar may not be my favourite movie but people act like what their saying is factual and that should be stopped.
Keep up the good videos :)
I find the film boring and didn't care for the messaging or trops but it made lots of money. Like what you like.
I openly said that’s a fine position to have.
I don't hate Avatar.
Based