more on Good vs Evil Versus Good vs Bad PART 1/3

jesus ipod After reading this post that bec let us all know about in a comment from a previous post I thought it would be good to open up a similar dialogue here if people are interested in discussing the considerations of the morality of the movies.

Here are a few of my favourite quotes from the post and ensuing comments:

chef hatAs they like to say over at the Food Network, great food starts with great ingredients. Neither of these films looked like they were made of anything resembling quality” said Heather Koerner (author of the post) after reading the “sins in the movie listed right before [her] eyes” over at plugged in.

It seems that Koerner is having trouble distinguishing between Good vs Evil and Good vs Bad. Not knowing what the movies were she was referring to doesn’t help confirm or deny this theory of mine but it sounds akin to views held by movie reviewers (Christian or not) – and that is, if they don’t like (what they read of) a film, whether it be because it offended their moral compass or just wasn’t their taste they deem it a bad film.

This is not at all what makes a film bad. A film is inherently bad if its made badly!

She seems to be getting onto the right track with this: “Maybe [the films] were artfully directed or cleverly written or brilliantly acted — but I didn’t think that I really cared to see someone flambe’ a rotten banana“. Or maybe not.

I think I understand her metaphor here. If the ingredients of the film are the story elements – language used, violence, sexual content etc and the method is how these ingredients are brought to audiences (“artfully directed or cleverly written or brilliantly acted“) then, indulge me with this metaphor:

stirring It is possible to take the same set of ingredients and make a good cake and a bad cake depending on the method.

Put another way, the story elements etc have limited to no bearing on whether or not the film is going to be good. You may have enjoyed the film, it may have been morally comforting but it could have been a stinker of a film. Because the method is what makes the film.

Before you respond to this metaphor – I don’t 100% agree with it. I’m just using the method the writer put forward to prove my (*cough*) dissenting point.

Tomorrow’s part 2.

As always, please leave your comments, I reckon we’re all keen to hear your views too…

Advertisements

2 Responses

  1. Bec’s comment on that post at Boundless was what led me here. 🙂

  2. Nice! Bec’s my biggest fan! – although jo, by the amount of times you’ve commented i reckon I’m becoming you’re biggest fan!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: