Clearly they are lol. This is what I don’t get about this place or film lovers in general:
Movies aren’t math. One person can see one thing and abhor it for their reasons. Another can see the same thing and adore it for their reasons. How you feel about a movie is about you, not the movie. It’s what you bring to it and what you want from it. What bothers one person may not bother another.
When we act like there’s a right and wrong to skin a cat, then we’re doing it wrong.
For me, the only things objectively wrong in movies is bad craft. Lighting, blocking, shoddy camera work, boom mics in the frame, etc. just bad technique behind the camera. But when we’re talking fight coordination, that’s going to be subjective. When we’re talking CG even that’s subjective because some people genuinely do not care.
There are several writers who genuinely love the movie and I’m not mad at them. There are those who hate it and I’m not mad at them. All art is subjective. All of it. And I just don’t think that’s a concept we adhere to anymore.
Well, the problem is that LONG ago, people stopped looking to reviews to inform them about a movie, and are instead looking to support their opinion of the movie. And to an extent, a lot of reviews are written with that in mind.
But you are right about nearly everything about art being subjective. Because for every movie with shytty CGI, there's someone out there ready to complain about how actual good CGI is annoying to them.
Although I'd argue that there are some things that while how someone values or feels about it might be subjective, the thing objectively is whatever it is. Like, anti-comedy is objectively written to be unfunny. But subjectively, you either get that the joke is supposed to be that it's unfunny, or you stop at the shyt just not being funny.