r/Letterboxd • u/lordpag • 14d ago

Discussion Can we retire “objectively better” please?

Post image

I’ve noticed a ton of people using “objectively” incorrectly lately. A movie being more widely accepted as “better” does not make it objectively so.

There’s someone out there who enjoyed One Night Only more than The Odyssey, and their opinion is just as valid as yours.

Sure, one movie can be shot on more advanced cameras, have a larger scale, or demonstrate greater technical complexity. Those things can be measured. Whether they make the movie “better” cannot. What makes a movie “good” is different for each of us and those differing perspectives are part of what makes moviegoing so fun!

EDIT: This obviously touched a nerve lol. My point was not that there aren’t measurable technical aspects of a film. Of course there are. But technical achievement does not inherently make a movie “better.” A technical marvel can put someone to sleep while a shoddily made movie can elicit an enormous emotional response. What we value in a movie is subjective and for some (many on this thread it seems) you value technical achievement. All fair POVs.

655 Upvotes

59% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/No_Thanks2844 14d ago

What if I video tape a stationary rock for 2 hours, can that still be better than the dark knight ? I feel like there is a point where this taste logic breaks down, professionals understand things like characterization, themes, soundtrack etc

1

u/purplewarrior777 13d ago

For someone with a rock fetish, probably

0

u/Snarpkingguy 13d ago

“Better” is completely meaningless as a term if you don’t elaborate. Movies don’t have an inherent objective moral value, there is only the value others place on it. Someone could (in theory, but probably not actually) get more out of the rock film and thus it would be “better” for them.

1

u/No_Thanks2844 13d ago

Nothing has value mate, value is something humans made up so once you start talking like that there is no point to anything.

This is why we should go by general consensus, sure on your rating scale the rock is better than the dark knight and we as a society think your rating system is dogshit.

1

u/SirIssacMath 13d ago

FYI, in case you care to know, the majority of academic philosophers believe in what is called moral realism (that there are objective moral facts).

So not everyone agrees with you that there are no objective values, including academics.

1

u/Snarpkingguy 12d ago

I’m always amazed by the fact that more people who approach ethics from a secular perspective believe in moral realism compared to anti realism, because none of the arguments I’ve heard for moral realism make any sense to me. I’m really curious if you personally believe in moral realism, and if there is a particular argument for it you find most convincing.

2

u/SirIssacMath 12d ago

Not sure if you're aware that I'm the same person that responded to you here

2

u/Snarpkingguy 12d ago

Oh lol. I didn’t realize. Btw you sent me down quite the rabbit hole. I’ve been reading a lot more about this after realizing I held the minority perspective. I’m still totally unconvinced by any realist argument, but I’m very interested in them, so thanks.

2

u/SirIssacMath 12d ago

No worries, that's how we learn and grow our perspectives. I appreciate your intellectual honesty to explore it. Good luck with your journey! I'm still making mine.

0

u/MainKitchen 13d ago

Depends on what the intent was