Cognitive Biases

Jerry Martin19 RegularOP

367 messages
joined Nov 2006

#1 · Jun 2, 2007

So you watch a movie. You watch it again, maybe a third time. Most likely reason: you actually liked it. Then, a day or two later, you're sitting in some coffee shop with a fresh film mag you just grabbed at a 7-Eleven down the street... You're holding this raw magazine, still smelling that glossy cover ink, dying to check out the latest reviews. You flip through, page by page, until you hit three consecutive reviews about, say, Zodiac. You're stoked, so you read every word. It’s about *that* movie—the one you went to see three days in a row because the first viewing just blew your mind and left you wanting more. And then "bam." Here comes the critical breakdown where, of course, the critics lay out their opinions and flaws. They criticize, as the name implies, convinced they can see things the average fan can't. You read one, then another, then a third, and realize they can't even agree with each other. It's maddening. You can't believe you're paying actual damn money just to be served someone else's opinions—opinions you might accidentally swallow and then end up sharing with people who act like machines designed to produce specific results. If you realize that this whole thing is just an indirect debate over taste—since the sheer amount of conflicting criteria proves there's no consensus—then you have to admit this isn't much different from a random thread on a forum, just with fancier vocabulary. And then someone tells me that "knowing" film and being a critic is a profession that demands respect. I really have to wonder if it's right to let someone else's criteria dictate my own perspective after I've just had a personal experience with a film...

Like Hercule Poirot said: "opinions are like assholes. everybody 's got one" (not sure who coined it originally. I think it was Brian Molk, the guy from Placebo)

The saddest part is you aren't even allowed to criticize the critics, because then you're putting yourself in the same boat, and those standards become some kind of "peace struggle". So now I'm going "criticizing against criticism". You just can't go against those critics 😠

What do you guys think about all this?

(this whole scenario with Zodiac is just a hypothetical example)

Jerry Martin19 RegularOP

367 messages
joined Nov 2006

#2 · Jun 2, 2007

Feels like the movie buffs on this sub are gonna lynch me for this one. Hope I'm wrong 😢

Eric Jackson43 Active Member

73 messages
joined Dec 2006

#3 · Jun 2, 2007

Jerry Martin19 said:You go through one review, then another, then a third, and you quickly realize these guys can't even agree with each other.

Honestly, if a bunch of critics can't find any common ground, I’d say half of them don't know what they're talking about anyway.

Jerry Martin19 RegularOP

367 messages
joined Nov 2006

#4 · Jun 2, 2007

Eric Jackson43 said:If critics can't even agree with each other half the time, then they aren't doing their jobs right...

How do you even judge that without using specific criteria? And if you do, you're basically calling yourself a critic too. So, are you any good at it?...

btw, everyone’s got an opinion. most people don't see eye to eye. how are we supposed to know who's actually right?

electriccyclist15 Member

27 messages
joined Feb 2007

#5 · Jun 2, 2007

What can you even say about those critics who trash a movie, only to flip their script a few years later once it becomes a cult classic? I think that’s exactly what happened with Ebert and his take on Blade Runner. Critics are critics—some are great, some are terrible, some are boring, and some are fun—but honestly, you shouldn't take most of them too seriously (especially here in the States, where half the critics seem to be on such a massive ego trip it's almost ridiculous)

Jerry Martin19 RegularOP

367 messages
joined Nov 2006

#6 · Jun 2, 2007

electriccyclist15 said:And don't even get me started on critics who trash a movie only to flip-flop once it becomes a cult classic a few years later. I think that’s exactly what happened with Ebert and his take on Blade Runner. Look, critics are critics—some are good, some suck, some are boring, some are fun—but honestly, you shouldn't take most of them too seriously (especially here in the States, where half the critics are on such a massive ego trip it's actually embarrassing)

This is a solid take on critics, but you really have to learn who's worth listening to and who isn't. I don't mind when they lay out facts or break down a film's merits—that's just a proper review. But trashing a piece of work like they're sentencing a serial killer to death? That's just arrogant and full of itself. At the end of the day, a critic is just a person, just like you or me, and we all have tastes. So, a critic uses their taste in every single piece they write. Isn't that obvious? Honestly, I'd probably just abolish that whole "professional" status altogether. Man, I sound like some failed dictator hungry for power, but hey, it's a hopeless situation...😳

rowdybadger41 Active Member

72 messages
joined Jan 2008

#7 · Jun 2, 2007

Only idiots actually let critics dictate their tastes.
I read today that some critic thinks the new Linkin Park album is a masterpiece. ☕

If I watch a movie and find myself hitting replay because I loved it so much, some random critic's opinion doesn't mean a thing to me.
Besides, they probably didn't even finish the movie; they were likely either stoned or stressed out with a toddler on their lap while typing away at their laptop.
Honestly, who even are these critics? What kind of schooling did they go through?
Have they watched enough films to lecture us on what counts as trash versus a masterpiece?
It’s just like when my little brother tells me, "I've played every game ever made, and Silent Hill is mid. FIFA is the best."

Burn them all, I say. 😍

Raymond Palmer8 Active Member

144 messages
joined Jul 2006

#8 · Jun 2, 2007

Top-tier critics love dissecting movies down to the bone without even seeing them first...
...but this forum gets it done...😁

electriccyclist15 Member

27 messages
joined Feb 2007

#9 · Jun 2, 2007

It’s always funny when someone mentions Vertigo, then has Ilinčić go on a tear against Pirate from Caribbean 3 (which I haven't even seen yet, nor am I a huge fan), only to admit they didn't even finish the movie. I honestly don't get how anyone has the nerve to critique or analyze something without actually watching it through...
Still, you have to distinguish between casual critics and actual film theorists like Peterlić, because those guys can sometimes actually have something insightful to say.

nimblemarlin6 Active Member

228 messages
joined Aug 2012

#10 · Jun 2, 2007

Some critics—especially those hacks over at the local weekly papers—often, if you'll excuse my language, talk absolute nonsense. Honestly, sometimes I just want to grab them by the throat when I read some hack's take on an absolute masterpiece like "Zodiac." Being a critic isn't exactly rocket science—anyone who can string a sentence together thinks they're qualified. Around here on the forum, though, you see some truly sharp, witty analysis. Real criticism comes from the gut; there’s nothing "objective" about it. The kind of reviews I actually respect come from people who clearly have some skin in the game—people who've actually watched enough films to know their stuff, who genuinely love the medium, and who present a clear, passionate perspective. You don't necessarily have to believe them... you just take it into consideration.
But those anonymous types in the newspapers, trashing a work of art? It's pathetic. Everyone knows at least one of those "critics" who couldn't care less and is basically just filling space to collect a paycheck, hiding behind those stiff, pretentious sentence structures they think make them sound professional...

Doesn't a director say somewhere: "Why doesn't any child dream of becoming a critic?"

Jerry Martin19 RegularOP

367 messages
joined Nov 2006

#11 · Jun 2, 2007

rowdybadger41 said:so I read today that some critic thinks the new Linkin Park album is actually great... ☕

honestly, they probably didn't even watch the whole movie, and that review was likely written by someone who was either stoned or just stressed out with a toddler crawling on them while they puked on their laptop.
seriously, who even are these critics? what kind of schooling did they go to?
did they watch every single movie ever made just so they can lecture us on what's trash and what's a masterpiece?
it's like when my little cousin tells me, "I've played every game in the world and Silent Hill is mid. FIFA is the best."

burn them all, I say. 😍

🙏 🙏 🙏

nah, only idiots actually read reviews and let them dictate their taste.

don't be so harsh 🙂

if I watch a movie—and more than once because I loved it so much I couldn't stop—some random critic's opinion that I don't even know doesn't touch me at all.

it doesn't really touch me, but it bugs me how much they're pushed. it's a bit concerning...

anyway, burn them all 🙂

Cerb and nimblemarlin6, you guys are my favorites tonight 😁

mellowtrucker44 Member

16 messages
joined Jun 2007

#12 · Jun 3, 2007

I read the reviews, sure, but I NEVER, and I mean never, let them dictate my mood. How is some stranger supposed to tell me if a movie is actually good or total trash? They can't... I won't truly know until I sit down and watch it myself.

Though, in my experience, if the critics absolutely hate on a flick, there's a pretty good chance it's actually great. I've sat through a ton of movies that got trashed by the pros, yet I’ve never personally felt disappointed... Meanwhile, all those "masterpieces" they rave about usually end up being a complete waste of my time.

northernangler17 Member

49 messages
joined Oct 2006

#13 · Jun 3, 2007

Honestly, it really gets under my skin when some critic writes something like that—and why? Because for me, watching movies actually has a point, and that is—I LIKE THE MOVIE! Even if that movie might "objectively" (not that objectivity even exists, I guess) be nothing special, and even if everyone else is trashing it just to stroke their own egos and act like they're film experts. I don't care! If there’s something in that movie that I—actually like?! Something that pulled me in? Something that triggered an emotion in me! THAT is the whole purpose of cinema, THAT is what matters most! You shouldn't be out there dissecting a film into a million tiny pieces and analyzing every single part separately, because then you just kill the magic of the experience. It’s about that feeling you have left over after the credits roll! People are different, so tastes are obviously different too. For example, I love all sorts of genres. When I'm not in the mood for something "serious" and just want to relax and laugh, I'll watch some rom-com, no matter how cliché, formulaic, or stupid it is. If those clichés bother me too much, then I won't enjoy the movie, so it won't be memorable or anything, and that's that—move on. On the other hand, if I find myself checking the clock more than once an hour, it means something is wrong (because when I actually like a movie, I get totally sucked in, heart and soul). So yeah, I watch movies for myself and for my own enjoyment. Sure, it's nice to read a good review of a movie I loved, but it isn't decisive at all—in fact, it doesn't even matter! Beauty is in the eye of the beholder 😉 and if I like something for one reason or another, who cares if someone else doesn't?

Anyway, at least that's how I see things 😍

wiredranger30 Member

33 messages
joined Dec 2006

#14 · Jun 3, 2007

Jerry Martin19 said:I'm curious—what’s everyone's actual take on all this?

Wait, about what exactly? 😕 🙏

Oh, Jerry Martin19... what's eating you this time? What's got you so worked up again? 🤣

Thomas Davis13 Newcomer

9 messages
joined Aug 2007

#15 · Jun 3, 2007

mellowtrucker44 said:I read the reviews, sure, but I NEVER—and I mean never—let them dictate my opinion. How is some stranger supposed to tell me whether a movie is actually good or garbage? They can't. I won't know until I sit down and watch it myself.

You read my mind👍. I don't lean on critics at all. I've been let down by "masterpieces" far too many times, and I've found myself genuinely enjoying plenty of movies that everyone else seemed to hate.

feralorca82 Active Member

154 messages
joined Mar 2011

#16 · Jun 3, 2007

Does it actually matter if you like a movie or if the critics do?
Honestly, who cares what the critics think? Most of them have nothing better to do than tear people down. It’s just how they vent their frustrations because half of them probably failed at being actual writers or directors back in the day.

p.s. If any critic is offended by this, good. I meant every word.😈

northernangler17 Member

49 messages
joined Oct 2006

#17 · Jun 3, 2007

feralorca82 said:p.s. if any critics felt offended by this, good. I mean, I really don't care and I stand by everything I said. 😈

🤣 🤣 🤣 good one! 🙏 🙏 👍 👍

Jerry Martin19 RegularOP

367 messages
joined Nov 2006

#18 · Jun 3, 2007

wiredranger30 said:
What’s this even about? 😕 🙏

Man, Jerry Martin19, what's eating you this time? What's the big drama... 🤣

other people's opinions, which are basically shoved down the throats of readers and viewers by some media dictatorship and then just taken for granted 😠

then those opinions get shaped into "public consensus" that I'm apparently not allowed to challenge 😠

so why can't I, for example (not that I'd want to, just an example 🙂), write something myself and have people actually follow my lead? 😕

wiredranger30 Member

33 messages
joined Dec 2006

#19 · Jun 3, 2007

Jerry Martin19 said:External opinions—which are essentially forced upon readers and viewers by some sort of media dictatorship—are being taken "as gospel" 😠

once those views coalesce into what people call "public opinion," I simply cannot ignore them. 😠

So why can't I, for instance (and please, don't thank me, this is just an illustration 🙂), write something myself and have everyone else follow my lead? 😕

Look, don't take them as gospel. If someone else chooses to swallow the hype, that’s their business—it shouldn't be your headache. 👍

And why on earth can't you move past it once it becomes "public opinion"? Is your own perspective more important than the consensus? I assume it is, which means you're stuck.

Jerry Martin19 RegularOP

367 messages
joined Nov 2006

#20 · Jun 3, 2007

wiredranger30 said:Look, don't just take them for granted. If someone else starts doing it, you'll feel the sting, and then the problem solves itself. 👍

And why can't you just move on if it becomes the consensus? Is your opinion really more important than what everyone else thinks? I'm guessing yours is, so...

Fair enough. That's a solid suggestion and one I usually stick to, but this is more about the individual. For the future of movies, critics are basically inviting a collapse. Think about it—if a movie gets trashed now, in a few decades, hardly anyone will even know it exists because the critics spat on it. People won't know about something like Zodiac (just an example, haven't heard much hate for it yet) because the critics didn't let it blow up when it actually mattered, regardless of what the audience thought. Doesn't that pose a real threat to the future of cinema and general film culture?

And if we all agree here (which looks like we do) that we don't need critics, then why are they still around? What the hell keeps them grounded? 😠

Cognitive Biases

🔗 Similar threads