 | | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) Agree with everything you say in that paragraph. But a film can still be low quality in my eyes even if there was a lot of time and money spent on it, and the technicians knew their craft. Consider "Waterworld". Conversely, a film can be high (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) I would argue that. I would also say that while the market _is_ what should determine what gets made, it's not the same as an objective quality metric. It's a popularity metric. Due to preferences and finances and whole slew of other (...) (25 years ago, 27-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism —Jesse Long
|
| | | | Christopher Weeks <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:37C6AA90.8AAC20...pse.net... (...) Here's the million dollar qustion: how can the general public be competent enough to be an adequate judge of movie quality (or of political (...) (25 years ago, 30-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | (...) I would say that they are an adequate judge of both. They may spend their cash on each as they see fit. And they're wrong on both counts. --Chris (25 years ago, 31-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Because it's an opinion, and thus subject to polling (in the form of box office receipts), rather than proving or disproving (...) Ditto, although I'd say right now the system is rigged so the GP doesn't get a fair chance to say what they (...) (25 years ago, 31-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
