True, but even if I see a movie that doesn't appeal to me, I expect to see effort. I saw the Lego Movie, and ended up being one that didn't like it. However, while I found it to be a rather simplistic parody of the chosen one trope overall, there was clear creative effort to it and the big reveal was admittedly pretty clever. Minions on the other hand felt to me like it was trying to give a fun time to its target audience with the littlest effort possible.
I didn't expect much from Minions aside from a bit of creativity with its brand humor, but it didn't even deliver that much.
"a director has some great responsibility to deliver awe"
As expensive as movies are these days, yeah, the kind of do have a responsibility to make sure their art is crafted in such a way that, if we're not entertained, we can at least appreciate what they were doing. I have an appreciation for Birdman and The Lego Movie despite not really enjoying either. I can't say the same for Minions.
If you're happy and you know it, go sit in the corner and think about your life.
reply
share
goodbyeenemyairship
9 years ago
Granted, you are the norm today - I am not, but I see the whole idea absurd.
The idea being - entertainment must meet some level of user-defined quality or else a) total failure, wasted my life for its duration; or b) a crime has been perpetrated, grab a pitchfork.
comparing 2 films seems absurd to me - measuring the success or failure of a film at all seems absurd to me (an hour & change of storytime should register neutral for the worst) - but worst yet, inserting oneself into the equation is the most absurd - no critique of an artform is free of the critic's self importance.
No art has any responsibility. Your art might have a goal & whether or not your art achieved your own goal is up to you to decide - but this is just past time stuff, we take it so seriously because we have strayed that far from reason.
reply
share
Unvoiced-Apollo
9 years ago
I think art in which you have to pay to see before you can effectively critique it does deserve to have the artist's effort called into question if the quality is also lacking. As I said, there are many movies I don't like but recognize the quality.
Art doesn't have to have meaning and the whole audience doesn't have to like it. But the artist should still be able to show the effort put into it. I think Pollack's works are an absolute mess, but I know I would never be able to re-create them.
If you're happy and you know it, go sit in the corner and think about your life.
reply
share
goodbyeenemyairship
9 years ago
These points are ok, somewhat valid - but reliant on the basis that this film was clearly, objectively low quality/little effort involved - a claim that cannot be substantiated.
You vote low quality - I vote in opposition & your vote is cancelled out. My son & his buddy who went with us, add their 5 year old votes in & we end up 2 votes up in the 'high quality' category.
This is why it's not a worthy endeavor. If you are bored enough, perhaps, but it still makes no sense because entertainment cannot be guaranteed, it's a gamble as to whether or not your unique experience will be as the artist intended.
I think of most experiences in life, but particularly experiencing a work of some form of art - it's not about who you are, it's not about what it is, what really matters is where those 2 points intersect that makes or breaks the value of the experience for you as a person.
Filmmakers can't account for that - it's unrealistic to expect as much.
reply
share