Search results

Yes, and as I said above, I agree that there is a case for "objective aesthetics," or rather varying depths of subjectivity...because subjects, by their very nature, cannot be truly objective, but their subjective view can be more or less sophisticated or developed (e.g. the taste palate of a...

Well I would tend to agree with this--in that my aesthetic observations are the same as yours, and find it strange that some think the opposite. But some do, so.... No, not at all, afaict. It is generally agreed that GoT plummeted in quality after season 6 and especially with season 8, though...

Yup. I was almost going to mention this. Most of my very favorite films usually aren't on the "greatest films" lists that are usually bandied about - and I recognize that, in terms of what is generally considered good film-making among film-makers and aficionados, aren't necessarily on the same...

Certainly, and I think having knowledge of a given field tends to lend credence to one's opinion of something within that field. But that only goes so far; and "experts" aren't inherently more right than "non-experts" (not to mention the difference between being an art critic and an artist). If...

I'd be interested in that in theory. But it really depends upon how it was done, and who was doing it. Book-to-film adaptations run the gamut from really good (GoT) to pretty good (LotR) to fairly awful (RoP)...all imo, of course. But yeah, imagine Lord of the Rings spread out over six seasons...

Yes, of course. And the contrary is also true: just because you perceive the show to have artistic merit, doesn't mean it is present in some kind of objective, intrinsic way. Which is why I think the most peaceful compromise--at least for us--is accepting that different people have different...

That would be incorrect. But you get kudos for not mentioning Guardians of the Galaxy.

Evidently the Noldor acted like petulant adolescents in CW teen dramas. Anyhow, I'd love to see someone do a mash-up of Morfydd Clark's Galadriel in Riverdale.

You just can't stop yourself can you? But sure. Those with good, sophisticated taste agree with me, and those with bad taste, disagree. ;)

@Parmandur, I think we've gone around in circles enough to know that we just massively disagree and aren't going to convince the other. You think it is high art, I think it is poor film-making. Etc, etc. I can only return to where I started: There's no accounting for taste."

We probably need a few more years to adequately answer this question. The books you mentioned have all stood the test of time and become classics in the field; we don't (yet) know what among books of the 21st century will be considered classics in another few decades. That said, we do know...

Of course there is. I don't think anyone is saying that the show-runners can't craft their own story. I've even seen some say that the show is at its strongest when it is dealing with characters they've created. I think the complaint is how they wiggle, not that they wiggle.

Speaking more generally.... Culturally speaking, there's always a rush to love (or agree with) the Latest Thing. A lot of this is fueled by PR and advertisement campaigns. Everyone must love the Latest Thing, because...it is the Latest Thing, and is what everyone loves! (Even if it is obvious...

To quote the Big Lebowski, "That's just like your opinion man." You keep stating, again and again, that this "is" a 5-star show, like it is some ontological fact, when what you're really saying is that you love it, and you can't understand why others don't love it. Now I will give you this...

Is it really, though? That's one reading of it, but tends to cast an overly negative light. Another is that we've seen a wide range of opinions expressed, and there have been no outright insults flung. I'd like to think that cultural discourse can re-embrace "civil disagreement," and this...

"More true" doesn't mean "very true." And there are all kinds of divergences, but the spirit of Jackson's trilogy is more aligned with Tolkien than Payne/McKay. IMO, of course.

Not sure what you are getting at here. Sure, people can legally make stories in Tolkien's world, but just because they can doesn't mean they'll be good, or that they'll capture the "spirit of Tolkien." And in that Letter 131 quote, I'm not sure Tolkien was advocating for people to write books...

I was talking about the elvish rings.