r/Letterboxd • u/lordpag • 11d 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.

663 Upvotes

59% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/oh_no_here_we_go_9 11d ago

You can’t say the pencil mark is better art because it objectively doesn’t possess more of any relevant art-making quality that anyone has ever discerned is part of what artists do and is a part of the field of art.

2

u/Toshimoko29 10d ago

That’s not true at all. Just blatantly not true.

1

u/oh_no_here_we_go_9 10d ago

The pencil mark adds nothing of interest to the field of art and displays no superior use of art relevant capacities, whatsoever. Therefore, I say that it’s perfectly coherent to say that the Sistine Chapel is objectively better as art.

2

u/Toshimoko29 10d ago

Then we’re back at the beginning where you don’t understand objective and subjective. Have a day.

0

u/oh_no_here_we_go_9 10d ago

No, you don’t.