What makes a film "good"?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Discussion on the Kill Bill threads has got me lingering on this question.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Broadly speaking, a "good" movie is a movie I enjoy.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:16 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm torn on this issue; often I really love films for the way they confront aspects-of-life, other times I've been won over on films by nothing more than cinematography and editing. Sometimes actors/actresses will give wonderful performances in movies I would otherwise despise, winning my adoration even over shitty scripts or poor art direction.

Yeah so I'm obviously all over the place with regards to this question. How 'bout y'all?

(x-post I'd agree with Dan but I've seen movies I didn't "enjoy" that I consider wonderful...Dancer in the Dark for one)

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:18 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.cnn.com/SHOWBIZ/9604/15/hollywood.minute/judge_reinhold.jpg

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:22 (twenty-two years ago)

What Dan said. I might enjoy it for lots of different reasosns, but I gotta like it. There's nothing you can outright say makes anything good or bad.

― s1utsky (slutsky), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Except the dude that stevem posted.

― s1utsky (slutsky), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:22 (twenty-two years ago)

I loved "Dancer In The Dark" and "Amistad" but I don't think I'll be able to watch either of them ever again because of the overwhelming emotional reactions I had to them.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:23 (twenty-two years ago)

i felt the same after Weekend At Bernie's

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:32 (twenty-two years ago)

sorry sorry, serious now...i consider a film to be good if it triggers particularly resonant emotional responses within me personally but alongside this establishes general ambience well via use of quality acting, dialogue, music, effects (meaning simple but effective camera shots as much as CGI or whatever) and plot structure.

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:35 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd agree with stevem.

― Nicolars (Nicole), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:54 (twenty-two years ago)

I get the feeling that if Nicolars opened her front door and found Judebot and Judge Reinhold standing there wearing posing trunks and baby oil, Detroit might implode.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 13 October 2003 14:59 (twenty-two years ago)

?!?!?!

― Nicolars (Nicole), Monday, 13 October 2003 15:04 (twenty-two years ago)

I think the entire world might implode if something like that occurred regardless of whose house they decided to visit.

There are different things that make different films good. It is impossible to answer this question because the criteria that makes one film "good" might cause another film to completely fail at being "good" because it is "good" in a different way.

― Ally (mlescaut), Monday, 13 October 2003 15:06 (twenty-two years ago)

yeh that could be true. Scorsese's Kundun kinda meets all the criteria i outlined above but is it any good? hmmmmm...

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 13 October 2003 15:07 (twenty-two years ago)

And what of movies like Star Wars or something? They have terrible acting and dialog but they're still "good" to billions of people.

― Ally (mlescaut), Monday, 13 October 2003 15:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Hmm, yes this is true.

AI is a mediocre movie, btw.

― Nicolars (Nicole), Monday, 13 October 2003 15:13 (twenty-two years ago)

i love Star Wars but i will concede that it's not a 'good' movie in the high-art respect, but yeh it's good entertainment, great even. that's not to undermine the awesome artistic endeavours that go into films like the recent Star Wars and Matrix films (a lot of people are biased against them, negating the superb technical execution and aesthetics/design etc. because Keanu is wack...but why should individual performances or a muddled plot take precedence over aforementioned aesthetic and technical qualities when it comes to evaluating a movie? kind of a devil's advocate question i suppose because i'm sure the answer is human interest/being able to relate and understand what's going on = most key requirement for a film by and large)

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 13 October 2003 15:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Jim Carrey

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 13 October 2003 15:19 (twenty-two years ago)

ally otm

― s1utsky (slutsky), Monday, 13 October 2003 15:21 (twenty-two years ago)

How to make a film good, by Nick A.
Take one from column A, one from column B, and one from column C:

A
Jack Nicholson
A bus that will blow up if not consistently powered by a string of "Yo mama" jokes
An orangutan
A talking cat
A climactic basketball game between the ragtag team of misfits and the state champs
George Clooney
John Goodman
A rock band made up of spirited teenage girls, played by 28-year-old actresses
A sports car possessed by the spirit of a deceased insult comic (the voice of Don Rickles)

B
Wanda Sykes
A scene where the bully gets his/her comeuppance and is humiliated in front of several Supreme Court justices
An emotional, yet hilarious, reconciliation between two middle-aged lesbian mothers and their adopted Hisanic son (Cheech Marin)
Joan Cusack
A skateboarding iguana with sunglasses
Zooey Deschanel
A 15-minute-long hardcore sex scene filmed on handheld digital video
Parodies of just-past-current TV commercials, like the "Dude, you're getting a Dell" guy.

C
Edgy guest appearances by actors from cheezy 80's TV show (I suggest the guy who played Screech from Saved by the Bell)
The woman who played the principal's secretary in Ferris Bueller's Day Off
A trying-on-clothes montage set to "Allstar" by Smashmouth
Tim Curry
A character "plays" the electric guitar and it's obviously fake
Zombies, and lots of them
Will Ferrell
A woman who's about to have a baby and doesn't know if she's been impregnated by Satan/an alien or if she's going INSANE!

― NA (Nick A.), Monday, 13 October 2003 15:42 (twenty-two years ago)

Dan is completely wrong, it's me liking a film that defines whether it is good or not.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Monday, 13 October 2003 16:32 (twenty-two years ago)

i. Robots (nb NOT ANDROIDS)
ii. Dinosaurs

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Monday, 13 October 2003 16:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Since I've spent most of the past weekend rediscovering my old HK favourites The Killer and Ming Jian, watching each three times, I can most assuredly say that all a film needs to be good is a combination of :

a) melodrama - esp. if "melo" = canto-chanson, preferably Klaus Schulze-informed - and
b) stylish, gory violence.

There are plenty of other ingredients that can make a film good, but these are the only ones that always work. At least for me.

― Herbstmute (Wintermute), Monday, 13 October 2003 16:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Tico Tico in "'Transformers: The Movie' is the best film EVAH" revelation!

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 13 October 2003 16:45 (twenty-two years ago)

I love the distinction between the robots and the androids though, it reminds me of a story I was privy to this weekend about how it'd be bad to rape an android but apparently a-ok to rape a regular robot.

― Ally (mlescaut), Monday, 13 October 2003 16:46 (twenty-two years ago)

But both would really hurt the weewee.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 13 October 2003 16:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm not saying I'm advocating this.

― Ally (mlescaut), Monday, 13 October 2003 16:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Robots who are also dinosaurs = a rip-off.

The distinction is made to prevent AI being good, also Blade Runner to be honest though if the unicorn had been a Triceratops it would have been better.

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Monday, 13 October 2003 16:51 (twenty-two years ago)

I've always thought of a "good film" as one that accomplishes what the director set out to do. Yeah, that's a terrible method of criticism, as it requires you to make your assumptions about intent, but there are no objective standards of what is "good." (I'd also substitute "successful" for "good" most of the time.)

Josie and the Pussycats (among many teen comedies) is a good/successful movie in my view, even though I'd have a hard time saying that if I had to judge it by the same criteria as a Citizen Kane or something.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Monday, 13 October 2003 17:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Citizen Kane is such a pointless movie, totally bereft of any redeeming qualities whatsoever. It's so bad I'm not even gonna waste my time watching it to find out if I'm right.

― just another nick (nickalicious), Monday, 13 October 2003 17:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Milo is ridiculously OTM.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 13 October 2003 17:57 (twenty-two years ago)

he is!

― cinniblount (James Blount), Monday, 13 October 2003 17:58 (twenty-two years ago)

plus it has rosario dawson (that's a good thing)

― cinniblount (James Blount), Monday, 13 October 2003 17:59 (twenty-two years ago)

(when are we gonna get a Rosario Dawson/Shannyn Sossamon buddy-movie? Maybe a Thelma and Louise sequel. I'd camp out like a Star Wars fanboy for that.)

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Monday, 13 October 2003 18:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Defining what's "good" is so hard to say, since that's obv subjective. I thought Run Lola Run was quite good because of the way the director was able to keep my attention on the story (what happens to Lola, the lead character, as well as the people around
her---from various points of view) using MTV-style vid techniques.

It also depends what mood I'm in when I'm watching something: if I'm pissed, for example, I won't pay attention to whatever I'm supposed to be watching.

― Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Monday, 13 October 2003 18:04 (twenty-two years ago)

(x-post) Counting on Thelma and Louise to rise up from the dead, Milo? Didn't they go over a cliff at the end?

― Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Monday, 13 October 2003 18:06 (twenty-two years ago)

Nah, they're dead. That's why we need Sossamon/Dawson, their hellbent-for-leather nieces. Or something.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Monday, 13 October 2003 18:10 (twenty-two years ago)

On the above thing, I figure that's why the movies I've absolutely hated are those where I find the filmmaker's vision muddled (or nonexistent) - Signs and Gangs of New York, for starters.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Monday, 13 October 2003 19:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Magnolia fits that bill for me.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 13 October 2003 19:10 (twenty-two years ago)

Signs could have been perfect if the aliens hadn't been so lame, or they hadn't been aliens and were just tommy knocker type things (i suppose they pretty much were anyway?) - i still love the suspense of it all, even Mel Gibson rules in it

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 13 October 2003 19:32 (twenty-two years ago)

when i saw "sossamon/dawson" i thought you were talking about the rules of attraction (reading backwards)

― ron (ron), Monday, 13 October 2003 23:13 (twenty-two years ago)

What makes a film "good"?

The edit.

― brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Monday, 13 October 2003 23:17 (twenty-two years ago)

A film is a sum of it's parts and even if there is an anwful part to it as a whole it can be good.

― A Nairn (moretap), Monday, 13 October 2003 23:56 (twenty-two years ago)

The edit.

Ah, you've accepted the cliche, then.

― Girolamo Savonarola, Tuesday, 14 October 2003 00:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Lots of cliches are true. Which one are you taling about?

― brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Tuesday, 14 October 2003 02:04 (twenty-two years ago)

Lots of cliches are true. Which one are you talking about?

― brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Tuesday, 14 October 2003 02:04 (twenty-two years ago)

Meh! Thought I hit stop in time ...

― brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Tuesday, 14 October 2003 02:05 (twenty-two years ago)

The cliche that the film is only truly made by the editor/in the editing.

― Girolamo Savonarola, Tuesday, 14 October 2003 02:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Are you saying that you can't dramatically alter the impact/message/tone of a film in how you edit it?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 14 October 2003 02:23 (twenty-two years ago)

I think he's just saying that the editor isn't the only and true author of the film, as some claim.

― s1utsky (slutsky), Tuesday, 14 October 2003 02:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Ha, I'm so busy looking for the gremlin under the bed I missed the axe murderer hovering over me.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 14 October 2003 02:28 (twenty-two years ago)

That's one thing that makes a film "good"--the presence of gremlins. (Or is that "Gremlins"?)

― s1utsky (slutsky), Tuesday, 14 October 2003 02:29 (twenty-two years ago)

I think he's just saying that the editor isn't the only and true author of the film, as some claim.

I think there's a lot of truth to the edit being pivotal, then, yes. In any medium generally, in film technically. I'd never go so far as "one and true author," though.

― brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Tuesday, 14 October 2003 02:34 (twenty-two years ago)

one year passes...

A good movie has a scene where a TV newscast is announcing some big, sudden event that's transpired, and it first cuts to a lonely middle-aged woman in a bathrobe and curlers watching the TV and then it cuts to a bunch of long-haired, leather-jacketed guys in a dimly lit biker bar watching TV.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 31 January 2005 06:49 (twenty years ago)

Xenomorphs, Vampyres, tits, car chases, unicorns

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Monday, 31 January 2005 07:42 (twenty years ago)

Can you substitute worried family and worried members of the seafaring community for the elderly woman and bikers? Perfect Storm 4ever.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Monday, 31 January 2005 07:46 (twenty years ago)

The less like Kill Bill a film is, the better it is.

― taranblotto, Monday, 31 January 2005 07:56 (twenty years ago)

The more like Kill Bill a film is, the better it is.

Agreed.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Monday, 31 January 2005 08:06 (twenty years ago)

All it has to be is enjoyable to me. I don't pay too much heed to direction, acting etc. All I need are my comedies to be funny, my horrors to be scary, and my thrillers to be tense. I don't ask for much and I'm glad I don't over analyse films. Means I enjoy more of them.

― Rumpkin, Monday, 31 January 2005 14:49 (twenty years ago)

surely films are tense or scary BECAUSE the direction is good (ie achieves its end), or funny BECAUSE the performers are good...?

― Miles Finch, Monday, 31 January 2005 14:53 (twenty years ago)

I tend to appreciate good art direction in a film (which is why I like Ridley Scott movies so much)

― Ste (Fuzzy), Monday, 31 January 2005 15:08 (twenty years ago)

I realized the other day I will remain enthralled with even the most poorly written, directed, and acted films, just for inspired cinematography.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 31 January 2005 16:57 (twenty years ago)

meryl streep

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 31 January 2005 17:14 (twenty years ago)

popcorn, iced coca cola.

― Ronan (Ronan), Monday, 31 January 2005 17:23 (twenty years ago)

me too, nickalicious.

― sgs (sgs), Monday, 31 January 2005 17:31 (twenty years ago)

a big budget

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 31 January 2005 17:46 (twenty years ago)

Michael Bay + Jerry Bruckheimer + Nic Cage = classic

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Monday, 31 January 2005 17:49 (twenty years ago)

I watched The Butterfly Effect yesterday (my dad was watching it and he was kind enough to help me do my taxes, so...), and it was excruciatingly bad on many levels, and yet I found the experience of watching it very enjoyable. I couldn't say I liked it ironically because the film seemed self-aware, and I couldn't say I liked it literally because the script was hackneyed and the acting was terrible. But yet I still wanted to see what happened next.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Monday, 31 January 2005 17:57 (twenty years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.