Horror Digital Forum  

Go Back   Horror Digital Forum > All Things Horror > General > Site Polls

View Poll Results: Best 5th Film in a Horror Franchise?
A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 5: The Dream Child 5 5.26%
Children of the Corn V: Fields of Terror 0 0%
Diary of the Dead 3 3.16%
Final Destination 5 11 11.58%
Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed 12 12.63%
Friday the 13th, Part V: A New Beginning 30 31.58%
Halloween 5 11 11.58%
Hellraiser: Inferno 2 2.11%
Howling V: The Rebirth 2 2.11%
Leprechaun in the Hood 0 0%
Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones 1 1.05%
Resident Evil: Retribution 3 3.16%
Return to Sleepaway Camp 1 1.05%
Saw V 2 2.11%
Seed of Chucky 4 4.21%
Silent Night, Deadly Night 5: The Toy Maker 1 1.05%
Taste the Blood of Dracula 4 4.21%
Texas Chainsaw 3D 1 1.05%
The Amityville Curse 1 1.05%
The Mummy's Curse 1 1.05%
Voters: 95. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-14-2014, 06:38 AM   #76
Anaestheus
HackMaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,275
As a people, we really need to get over this idea of "objectivity." It doesn't exist. It never has and it never will. On any front, there is no such thing as objectivity.
Anaestheus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2014, 06:53 AM   #77
Body Boy
HackMaster
 
Body Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaestheus View Post
As a people, we really need to get over this idea of "objectivity." It doesn't exist. It never has and it never will. On any front, there is no such thing as objectivity.
That's the point I've been trying to make...
Body Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2014, 11:47 PM   #78
DVD-fanatic-9
Remaking My Soul
 
DVD-fanatic-9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Horror
Posts: 3,268
Yet, the irony is that you are both trying to make an objective statement about subjectivity.

Contradiction in terms, you guys.
DVD-fanatic-9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 12:23 AM   #79
Body Boy
HackMaster
 
Body Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVD-fanatic-9 View Post
Yet, the irony is that you are both trying to make an objective statement about subjectivity.

Contradiction in terms, you guys.
What?

We're saying film quality is subjective. You're saying it's objective. But your response is that we're being objective about it being subjective?

We're not saying objectivity doesn't exist. An apple can be objectively red. The quality and worth of a film as art though is subjective...

Just... what the f

Body Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 12:27 AM   #80
DVD-fanatic-9
Remaking My Soul
 
DVD-fanatic-9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Horror
Posts: 3,268
Here you go again: trying to make objective statements about something you claim is subjective.

You're the one who doesn't realize how wrong you are.
DVD-fanatic-9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 12:51 AM   #81
Body Boy
HackMaster
 
Body Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVD-fanatic-9 View Post
Here you go again: trying to make objective statements about something you claim is subjective.

You're the one who doesn't realize how wrong you are.
And yet you do not have anyone else backing you up.

Body Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 02:15 AM   #82
DVD-fanatic-9
Remaking My Soul
 
DVD-fanatic-9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Horror
Posts: 3,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Body Boy View Post
And yet you do not have anyone else backing you up.
Life is not a game.

It's a cereal.
DVD-fanatic-9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 02:25 AM   #83
MisterTwister
HackMaster
 
MisterTwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,394
Well you can't back up rambling incoherent nonsense.
__________________
+6 trader.
MisterTwister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 02:29 AM   #84
DVD-fanatic-9
Remaking My Soul
 
DVD-fanatic-9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Horror
Posts: 3,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterTwister View Post
Well you can't back up rambling incoherent nonsense.
This coming from the guy with a Slumber Party Massacre II avatar. I guess you would know.
DVD-fanatic-9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 02:37 AM   #85
MisterTwister
HackMaster
 
MisterTwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,394
Oh ouch. You got me there
__________________
+6 trader.
MisterTwister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 02:38 AM   #86
DVD-fanatic-9
Remaking My Soul
 
DVD-fanatic-9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Horror
Posts: 3,268
No, you don't get it: you got yourself there.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Body Boy View Post
And yet you do not have anyone else backing you up.
I'm not the only one who sees the hypocrisy in your argument. You must admit that in your attempt to prove all opinions are subjective, you have not hidden your attitude that your whole argument is completely objective. Which is hypocritical. It's a perfect example of a contradiction in terms.

Think about it.

Last edited by DVD-fanatic-9; 04-15-2014 at 03:49 AM.
DVD-fanatic-9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 07:45 AM   #87
Body Boy
HackMaster
 
Body Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVD-fanatic-9 View Post
I'm not the only one who sees the hypocrisy in your argument. You must admit that in your attempt to prove all opinions are subjective, you have not hidden your attitude that your whole argument is completely objective. Which is hypocritical. It's a perfect example of a contradiction in terms.

Think about it.
Taking an "objective" stance on things being "subjective" does not make something hypocritical. I'd be a hypocrite if I said nothing in the world is objective. BUT I am talking about a measuring point to find out if a film is 'good' or 'bad'.

God, why do I even bother?...


Quote:
Originally Posted by DVD-fanatic-9 View Post
Life is not a game.

It's a cereal.
Now you've really lost me.

Last edited by Body Boy; 04-15-2014 at 07:47 AM.
Body Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 07:52 AM   #88
Anaestheus
HackMaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,275
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

First off, none of us are making "objective" statements. We are making definitive statements in that the definition of "objectivity" contains a set of descriptors that are impossible to achieve in reality. The basic stance of objectivity is that there are objects/properties that contain principles that are true regardless of the observer. But, for one, there is nothing in the universe that exists independent of an observer, see Heisenberg or the idea of quantum collapse for reference.

In the realm of some film's "goodness" there can be no objectivity as every individual will have a unique criteria for what defines "goodness". Even the idea of something approaching mere recognition of how well a film is crafted is going to be altered by each individual's definition of what the merits of that craft are.

From a popular standpoint, Bay's Transformer films are remarkably well crafted. The editing is actually quite interesting taken on its own merits. The sound design is amazing. The animation/CGI is ambitious in its detail. But, there are still a large number of people (myself included) who think they are utter crap because I'd much rather watch a Tarkovsky film. However, by the criteria of the box office, I am apparently quite wrong in that opinion.

Or to take from classical art, which is more "good" - Leonardo's linear perspective or the Chinese "flat" perspective? The answer depends on the way your culture taught you to read an image.

Everything that is created has baggage. Everything that is created has context. And every observer has a unique history that will affect how all that is interpreted. There is nothing that exists independent of that. Even the statement that someone made earlier that one can say that an apple is objectively "red" is not accurate as there is no way to prove that to every single person as the definition of "red" has implications. The best we can say is that this particular apple at this exact moment reflects light waves of X wavelength and that wavelength interacts with these particular cones and rods of the standard human's eye. After that, it's all open to individual interpretation.

And, if you think that any of those statements are objective, you are not using the word in accordance with the common definition of the word. Which actually would be a bit ironic.
Anaestheus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 07:58 AM   #89
Anaestheus
HackMaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,275
An analogy, just for fun:

Freud: You want to have sex with your mother
Patient: I do not want to have sex with my mother.
Freud: Your denial is proof that I am correct.
Anaestheus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2014, 07:59 AM   #90
Body Boy
HackMaster
 
Body Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaestheus View Post
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

First off, none of us are making "objective" statements. We are making definitive statements in that the definition of "objectivity" contains a set of descriptors that are impossible to achieve in reality. The basic stance of objectivity is that there are objects/properties that contain principles that are true regardless of the observer. But, for one, there is nothing in the universe that exists independent of an observer, see Heisenberg or the idea of quantum collapse for reference.

In the realm of some film's "goodness" there can be no objectivity as every individual will have a unique criteria for what defines "goodness". Even the idea of something approaching mere recognition of how well a film is crafted is going to be altered by each individual's definition of what the merits of that craft are.

From a popular standpoint, Bay's Transformer films are remarkably well crafted. The editing is actually quite interesting taken on its own merits. The sound design is amazing. The animation/CGI is ambitious in its detail. But, there are still a large number of people (myself included) who think they are utter crap because I'd much rather watch a Tarkovsky film. However, by the criteria of the box office, I am apparently quite wrong in that opinion.

Or to take from classical art, which is more "good" - Leonardo's linear perspective or the Chinese "flat" perspective? The answer depends on the way your culture taught you to read an image.

Everything that is created has baggage. Everything that is created has context. And every observer has a unique history that will affect how all that is interpreted. There is nothing that exists independent of that. Even the statement that someone made earlier that one can say that an apple is objectively "red" is not accurate as there is no way to prove that to every single person as the definition of "red" has implications. The best we can say is that this particular apple at this exact moment reflects light waves of X wavelength and that wavelength interacts with these particular cones and rods of the standard human's eye. After that, it's all open to individual interpretation.

And, if you think that any of those statements are objective, you are not using the word in accordance with the common definition of the word. Which actually would be a bit ironic.
Excellent post! Not sure it will do any good, but great.
And yeah, even when I typed the apple being objectively "red", in my head I was like "well, colorblind people wouldn't see 'red', but I'll go with it anyways"... I suppose 2+2=4 could be objective.
But either way,
Body Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright 1999-2014 Horrordvds.com

No text or images from this site may be reprinted or used elsewhere without express consent from Horrordvds.com