On being called a film 'snob'

johnny_ultimate

Hi, my name is Johnny (not really, only on the internet) and apparently I'm a film 'snob'. I don't particularly agree with that statement, I'd prefer to be called a film 'fan', but I'm going to go with it for the moment.

I consider myself to have a fairly eclectic taste in cinema. I'll watch most things, although have an intolerance for most generic crap. I'm probably considerably more interested in film than most, probably analysing it more than would be considered healthy. I watch films for more than entertainment, but also for entertainment, although I'm not always easily entertained. I also have weak points - I liked Spiderman, I enjoyed some parts of Indiana Jones IV (not all of it, but some of it), I have a weakness for many quirky indie films that would be quickly dismissed by many.

This, apparently, makes me a snob.

The word 'snob' is what I consider an argument killer. It instantly negates any criticism being made by party a (the snob) as party b (the non-snob) has made it known 'your opinion doesn't really matter, you're over-analysing'. Fair enough, argument over. But this greatly frustrates me, as it completely ignores how passionate and interested I am in the discussion and medium.

In IRL, I've been the snob (or 'the critic', another regular label) for a while. I remember attracting some ire when I dragged my friends to see Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind over Starsky & Hutch. We were like fifteen years old. They weren't best pleased.

Recently, I've been called a snob when I've tried to criticise Avatar. This really seems to rub people the wrong way, and I don't particularly want to get into it in detail here. As a piece of entertainment and visual spectacle, yeah it did the job. As a film, I could pick out a couple of flaws. I didn't think it was the best film of last year (far from it, I'd argue). This also makes me a snob in the eyes of some.

(For the record, Star Trek was much better)

To get to my rambling point, what I hate about being called a snob is that it implies something malicious, an incessant need to find flaws and be different. This couldn't be further from the truth. Cinema is a passion and a hobby for me, it has been for literally as long as I can remember. I love the simple joys of a new Pixar movie. I love working my way through Akira Kurosawa's body of work. I love being entertained by a Batman film. I love discovering the richness and variety of French New Wave cinema. Hell, I just love cinema.

In fairness to the party bs of this world, I'll readily admit that my tolerance for many types of film is very low. Law Abiding Citizen is one I was told by many people was very, very good, but it actually is very, very stupid. I may dismiss a random genre film quicker than most, but it's only because I know there are better films out there, and I'd much rather watch those better films (although 'better' probably is a subjective word too).

I have no problem with people watching a film to just be entertained, I'd say the vast majority of people approach cinema this way, in a far less obsessive way than I do. Yet having spent the time exploring what is out there, this isn't enough for me. It's a significant part of why I go to the cinema, but it is far from the only reason why. I love dismantling what works, and what doesn't work in a film. I hated Transformers 2 for many reasons (pacing, childish humour, messy narrative, questionable ideologies) but I can explain why. I didn't just hate it because it wasn't Rashomon. I hated it because it just wasn't very well made.

If all these reasons make me a snob, fair enough, I'll wear the label if you want. But I'd really love if we could disallow that word from being used in arguments about film. It doesn't help, it is just a conversation killer. We don't see eye to eye on Avatar, I'll readily accept that, but at least acknowledge that I'm making some valid criticisms. Again, this isn't because I prefer 'French Film Concerning Intercourse and Angst' (although that was awesome). It's just because I'm a film fan, and genuinely enjoy examining what is good and bad about cinema. Most of all, though, I just enjoy cinema.

ScumLord

TLDR you more than likely are a film snob. Only a film snob would write that much about not being a film snob.

johnny_ultimate

ScumLord wrote: »

TLDR you more than likely are a film snob. Only a film snob would write that much about not being a film snob.

[/end argument] :pac:

SugarHigh

tbh if you're constantly being called a snob then it probably has nothing to do with the films you watch and more to do with your attitude when talking about films to other people.

Maybe you don't come across as being genuine so people just think of you as yet another teenage intellectual who is insecure about their intelligence so over compensate by patronising and looking down on others.

johnny_ultimate

SugarHigh wrote: »

tbh if you're constantly being called a snob then it probably has nothing to do with the films you watch and more to do with your attitude when talking about films to other people.

Maybe you don't come across as being genuine so people just think of you as yet another teenage intellectual who is insecure about their intelligence so over compensate by patronising and looking down on others.

In some cases, I would agree with you. There are a few moments when I've got annoyed, probably argued a little too much about something that probably doesn't matter, or tried to give someone a recommendation which was probably... misguided. When I was younger, definitely more so - one argument I had which reflecting on it was just stupidity on my part.

But I try not to look down on others, in many cases I've felt they've been patronising, not even willing to have a discussion because of being a 'snob'. I've talked to many people who I can have a good discussion with, but also people who often jump for even suggesting that I didn't like a certain film.

There is perhaps an element of insecurity, but there is also the frustration of being looked down upon for looking into things more. On this forum, there have been many examples were a discussion has been instantly killed by the suggestion that someone is a snob where it wasn't warranted. It's just annoying.

SugarHigh

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

In some cases, I would agree with you. There are a few moments when I've got annoyed, probably argued a little too much about something that probably doesn't matter, or tried to give someone a recommendation which was probably... misguided. When I was younger, definitely more so - one argument I had which reflecting on it was just stupidity on my part.

But I try not to look down on others, in many cases I've felt they've been patronising, not even willing to have a discussion because of being a 'snob'. I've talked to many people who I can have a good discussion with, but also people who often jump for even suggesting that I didn't like a certain film.

There is perhaps an element of insecurity, but there is also the frustration of being looked down upon for looking into things more. On this forum, there have been many examples were a discussion has been instantly killed by the suggestion that someone is a snob where it wasn't warranted. It's just annoying.

ok, fair enough. You were a lot more open to what I said than I was expecting you to be so maybe my assessment of you was wrong.

johnny_ultimate

SugarHigh wrote: »

ok, fair enough. You were a lot more open to what I said than I was expecting you to be so maybe my assessment of you was wrong.

It was definitely a fair comment, one which I can't totally deny. I posted the OP because I think it's an argument I think the film board has seen a bit of over the last while, it's just what I see as a major obstacle in actually being able to discuss film in a sensible way. I have for sure been an ass on occasion, but with many I find it's like have a conversation with a brick wall

ScumLord

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

probably argued a little too much about something that probably doesn't matter,

They are the best arguments!

Zillah

Some people don't like to think critically (or never really learned how). You thinking critically makes them feel insecure, hence they rationalise it as being something wrong with you rather than them. You'll see it in everything, from food to books to films.

ps, you're absolutely right about Avatar.

indough

in assuming you are 'considerably more interested in film than most' you automatically qualify as a film snob imo, not insulting you or anything as i consider myself a film snob, no doubt

there are degrees of the condition and its important not to let it go too far, once you start considering all colour, non-subtitled films to be 'leave your brains at the door' flicks then you know you have a problem

ScumLord

indough wrote: »

there are degrees of the condition and its important not to let it go too far,

That's true it's important to self medicate with hard drugs and self gratification.

Duggy747

I've been called a film snob before based on the fact that I refuse to watch any of the Twilight Movies and utterly despise the Alien Versus Predator movies. (Piss all over my beloved franchises, will ya!?!)

Funny thing is I never criticise people on their choice of movies (well, maybe the ladies and their mushy tripe of movies :pac:) but I always get a beating for my types.................granted this coming from the same people who come to me with movie questions and they want to browse through and take my collection.

amacachi

I've been called a snob for not liking Avatar.:rolleyes: The fact that most stuff I like would most likely be pretty damn "low-brow" and I'm not into Indie stuff as far as I know, but hey, **** it!

ziedth

Interesting point OP,

First off you actually made me LOL when you said you over analyze movies and then go on to say you like parts of Indy IV

I have said it here before that I don't care for films Like the ones from Wes Anderson or films like Nic Cages the weatherman. I don't judge anyone who does happen to like them I just don't get them. Maybe that makes me a snob and if so I'll except it.

Having said that, films such as Taken that require you to just (and I hate the saying) leave your brain at the door are some of my fav nights out at the Cinema. So I can understand how your friends could get a little annoyed if ya don't get the point and point out the many plotholes.

If you prefer watching films your way johnny then to hell with what anyone else thinks. I guess just pick your battles on arguing what points to make, I agree with you about Avatar too but I enjoyed the night out purely for the 3D experience.

BTW, Indy IV!!!!!!!! Are you insane man

Valmont

I don't like Transformers and other films whose main draw is flashing colourful lights and loud noises; ergo I have been labelled a film snob. Somehow.

ronano

Zillah wrote: »

Some people don't like to think critically (or never really learned how). You thinking critically makes them feel insecure, hence they rationalise it as being something wrong with you rather than them. You'll see it in everything, from food to books to films.

ps, you're absolutely right about Avatar.

I'd imagine this is the case,there are some films you don't bother thinking about and i see some terrible crap but for me it's half the fun. You're not a snob and you're one of the best contributors to this board.

Renn

I've been called one for seemingly not liking any so called blockbuster. Going through this list - http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/ - the first one I'd only rewatch would be Terminator 2 in at #69. Stuff like The Dark Knight and Jurassic Park are good but there's loads more out there I'd rather be spending my time on watching.

MicraBoy

OP what's your definition of a film snob?

I know exactly the sort of person you are, having several friends just like you. I'd class you as a film enthusiast (I don't think film fan quite cuts it). Personally to me a film snob is someone who only watches a particular type of movie. You might think that has to be high brow stuff, but to me any one who insists only on watching the brain-candy type stuff and doesn't give all genres a go, is equally as guilty of being a film snob in their own right.

Being called aa film snob is a conversation (not arguement) killer, not unlike being called a (insert prefix)-nazi, in other areas.

L'prof

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

It was definitely a fair comment, one which I can't totally deny. I posted the OP because I think it's an argument I think the film board has seen a bit of over the last while, it's just what I see as a major obstacle in actually being able to discuss film in a sensible way. I have for sure been an ass on occasion, but with many I find it's like have a conversation with a brick wall

I think you just have to realise that while most people may enjoy watching movies, the most discussion you'll get out of many of them is "I liked that film, it was class." or "It was too boring." and even though I consider myself to have an interest in a greater range of films than a certain section of my friends, I find that I don't tend to try to discuss them at any great lengths.

storm2811

I thought Avatar was really really just over-hyped,when I watched it I was seriously just "meh" because from what everyone was saying "oh it's the best film I've ever seen!" etc etc.

But when I tell them I didn't like it,they don't call me a snob they just look at me like I'm mad/stupid.:pac:

I do like indie films aswell myself but now and again there's something in the mainstream that catches my eye,I thought The Wrestler was excellent,The Butterfly Effect aswell and Requiem for a Dream would be my favorite film but not sure if you'd call that mainstream or not,either way,it's great.:p

johnny_ultimate

indough wrote: »

there are degrees of the condition and its important not to let it go too far, once you start considering all colour, non-subtitled films to be 'leave your brains at the door' flicks then you know you have a problem

Don't worry, not that extreme yet. As I said, I definitely enjoy a leave your brain at the door film as much as the next person - last year, I'd pick out stuff like Drag Me to Hell, Star Trek and Up as particularly entertaining films. This is where some of the frustration comes from, as I by no means instantly write off everything that isn't 'arty'. In a lot of people's eyes, though, 'you didn't like it because it wasn't Korean' is an unfortunately valid argument.

Duggy747 wrote: »

Funny thing is I never criticise people on their choice of movies (well, maybe the ladies and their mushy tripe of movies :pac:) but I always get a beating for my types.................granted this coming from the same people who come to me with movie questions and they want to browse through and take my collection.

Yeah this is actually one of the strange points, someone might instantly attack you because you say how much you enjoyed a particular foreign film. Then try and discuss what they like and they'll attack you too. I guess my OP was directed at that type of person - 'you're a snob, and I'm right because I am' sort of argument

ziedth wrote: »

If you prefer watching films your way johnny then to hell with what anyone else thinks. I guess just pick your battles on arguing what points to make, I agree with you about Avatar too but I enjoyed the night out purely for the 3D experience.

BTW, Indy IV!!!!!!!! Are you insane man

Yeah I don't let it get in the way too much, but it does pop up say in work when everyone is saying how great Avatar was and I say "Well, it was good, but...". When you're actually ganged up on for making a point, then it's hard to pick battles as you're outnumbered. I just wish you could discuss films like that with people who aren't as interested in cinema as an 'artform', say, without the snobbery value judgement being brought in.

As for Indy IV, I know, but I enjoyed it at the time. I haven't watched it since, and I hated the CGI parts with monkeys etc..., but I also thought there were moments which captured the spirit of the franchise (such as the chase through the college). I fully admit I'm probably wrong here, and I'd likely hate it when I go back, but my gut reactions watching it first were rather positive :pac:

MicraBoy wrote:

OP what's your definition of a film snob?

Definition wise, I'd consider it more of an insult than anything. To me it's a value judgement, insinuating pretentiousness and cynicism. I'm not sure what the dictionary definition is, but for me it's just a loaded word, thrown out as something negative.

L'Prof wrote:

I think you just have to realise that while most people may enjoy watching movies, the most discussion you'll get out of many of them is "I liked that film, it was class." or "It was too boring." and even though I consider myself to have an interest in a greater range of films than a certain section of my friends, I find that I don't tend to try to discuss them at any great lengths.

Yeah this is the reality of the matter I guess. I've realised there's no point arguing about film with someone who is just going to stare back at you. On the other hand though, in an ideal world you should be able to rebute 'it was class' using valid criticisms. Alas, this isn't an ideal world. There are people who don't want to discuss it, but the frustration stems from people who want to discuss it, and then fight back with the snobbery argument.

And don't get me started on the word 'boring' :P

L'prof

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

And don't get me started on the word 'boring' :P

It drives me insane, almost every film I've recommended to my brother (apart from Sexy Beast) is too boring.

bonerm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I hated Transformers 2 for many reasons (pacing, childish humour, messy narrative, questionable ideologies) but I can explain why. I didn't just hate it because it wasn't Rashomon. I hated it because it just wasn't very well made.

Sounds to me like you are a film snob. TF2 wasn't very well made (only by your standards, expectations and preferences) but it was put together by a team of experts who knew exactly what they wanted, who they were aiming it at and how to produce it. Net result a $200m investment becomes an $800m return. I don't personally enjoy the movie but I doubt any of us here would know how to make a success story like that.

Where the wheels fall off the wagon in fandom is when a movie fan surrounds themselves with enough like-minded individuals and suddenly TF2 is the "wrong" way to make movies whereas Rashomon is "right".

Seems to me to criticise a TF2 for artistic reasons is like criticising a hamburger because it doesn't taste like steak. To even do so would be missing the point. If you want to criticise a movie then best to pick one that had particular aspirations and then subsequently failed to achieve them.

L'prof

bonerm wrote: »

Sounds to me like you are a film snob. TF2 wasn't very well made (only by your standards, expectations and preferences) but it was put together by a team of experts who knew exactly what they wanted, who they were aiming it at and how to produce it. Net result a €165.84m investment becomes an €663.35m return. I don't personally enjoy the movie but I doubt any of us here would know how to make a success story like that.

Personally, I don't care how much the film made. Maybe I was looking for too much after the first one, but it did nothing for me at all. They simply took the formula from the last film and threw it at the new one. The same can be said of Iron Man 2, they were well made in terms of special effects and they had to be, but I'd imagine they were as successful as they were on the back of their previous instalments and unless there's rave reviews in pre production, I'd expect the third films to slump even further in terms of Gross Revenue:Budget.

johnny_ultimate

bonerm wrote: »

Sounds to me like you are a film snob. TF2 wasn't very well made (only by your standards, expectations and preferences) but it was put together by a team of experts who knew exactly what they wanted, who they were aiming it at and how to produce it. Net result a $200m investment becomes an $800m return. I don't personally enjoy the movie but I doubt any of us here would know how to make a success story like that.

Where the wheels fall off the wagon in fandom is when a movie fan surrounds themselves with enough like-minded individuals and suddenly TF2 is the "wrong" way to make movies whereas Rashomon is "right".

Seems to me to criticise a TF2 for artistic reasons is like criticising a hamburger because it doesn't taste like steak. To even do so would be missing the point. If you want to criticise a movie then best to pick one that had particular aspirations and then subsequently failed to achieve them.

But Transformers does have aspirations - to be a mindless popcorn flick, really - that it fails to achieve (subjectively, yes, but then pretty much everything is subjective). There were better films that were mere entertainment released around the same time, can you not compare it to them? I'm not saying it's 'wrong', I'm just saying it was IMO bad, and there were reasons why I thought it was bad. It's the same as someone calling a film 'boring' - it's a criticism they want to level at the film. I'd call Transformers boring, I'd also say it's occasionally confusing and muddled. This isn't criticising it as art, it's criticising it as entertainment. Gross doesn't have much to do with - again, just because a film makes millions or billions, it isn't beyond criticism. Personally, I feel gross has little to with it, as it's subject to plenty of factors outside mere quality (marketing etc..). I preferred Avatar to Transformers, even in the sense that I was more entertained by the former than the latter. Transformers 2 was a massive success commercially, you can't deny that. But is it 'snobbish' to point out they didn't do everything perfectly? Hell, the stars and directors of the film pointed out it was from from perfect too.

mike65

A real 3 am thread this. "Nobody understands me Mwah! "

**** 'em, no point in not having an opinion about art, if they don't like your tastes (even if you are being obtuse in some of your picks) take it on the chin and stick to your guns.

Renn

Yeah I love this idea that certain movies can't be bad, regardless of how many million they make. A film can be a load of f*cking sh*t and still be a truly awful movie. Happens in the music industry, happens everywhere. From what I heard about TF2, the editing is supposed to be shocking in it but let's not talk about that...

Otis Driftwood

Im a complete snob when it comes to horror movies(as some of you will already know :P).I get terribly rankled when I hear/read about people praising stuff like the Saw series or all the remakes of the last number of years and the fact they havnt taken the time to familiarise themselves with the classics of the genre.

bonerm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

But Transformers does have aspirations - to be a mindless popcorn flick, really - that it fails to achieve (subjectively, yes, but then pretty much everything is subjective). There were better films that were mere entertainment released around the same time, can you not compare it to them? I'm not saying it's 'wrong', I'm just saying it was IMO bad, and there were reasons why I thought it was bad. It's the same as someone calling a film 'boring' - it's a criticism they want to level at the film. I'd call Transformers boring, I'd also say it's occasionally confusing and muddled. This isn't criticising it as art, it's criticising it as entertainment. Gross doesn't have much to do with - again, just because a film makes millions or billions, it isn't beyond criticism. Personally, I feel gross has little to with it, as it's subject to plenty of factors outside mere quality (marketing etc..). I preferred Avatar to Transformers, even in the sense that I was more entertained by the former than the latter. Transformers 2 was a massive success commercially, you can't deny that. But is it 'snobbish' to point out they didn't do everything perfectly? Hell, the stars and directors of the film pointed out it was from from perfect too.

WRT TF2 I don't think Bay and co have any great aspirations when it comes to making a blockbuster movie. I see absolutely no evidence in any of his movies that he wants to do anything other than appeal to 13 year old boys and make the screen explode from start to finish. This has been his method ever Pearl Harbour and he does it like no one else in the world can. I know what you mean about comparing it with (and on the level with) other summer popcorn flicks but I don't think he's even aiming his bar as high as that. He's basically trying to make brainless, critic-proof, lowest-common-denominator movies that can be sold globally and turn a profit and in this regard he achieves his goals. I honestly don't think he has any ambitions to make "Raiders of the Lost Ark" for example and that his movies should be judged appropriately.

I'm not surpirsed the actors said it was far from perfect. They were totally under-utilised. As for Bay I haven't heard his comments but it's common-place for a director to conclude that the end result of a movie didn't live up to whatever it was they had hoped (especially when a project is as unweildy as this and usually blaming the input of others). I would be surprised if he wasn't still generally favourable about the result tho and I do feel TF2 was consistent (for whatever that's worth!) with his other work.

Basically the guy is the worlds biggest hack. He'll always take a quick profit over making a good movie. Either way I don't think it is the ideal example when it comes to talking about a film that should be derided or looked down upon.

Renn

Still doesn't explain how the guy is a snob if he didn't like TF2...

Anakin.S

f your opinion of a film does not take into account the genre or the intended audience then you are a film snob.

bonerm

Renn wrote: »

Still doesn't explain how the guy is a snob if he didn't like TF2...

Because I feel within the popcorn genre it's kind of snobbish to decide "what works" and what doesn't. The movie that makes a profit works, regardless of its content.

Galvasean

I'm always being called a film snob, but strangely I enjoyed Transformers 2 (despite its obvious flaws).
Arguments like 'Youre a film snob' or "But you have bad taste in films" are just argument killers, used by people who cannot express their opinions properly and want to shut up teh person they are debating with.

Personally I'm surrounded by what I classify as film snobs in college, the type of people who will constantly judge a film before watching it and when asked to name the greats of cinema will recite off a list directly from the Virgin book to cinema snobbery.

To me a snob is someone who watches a very linear type of cinema, who looks down upon anyone who enjoys a film such as Transformers and will judge a film before watching it.

I enjoy all aspects of cinema, be they a 3 hour existential comedy about the meaning of life or be it a 90 minute men on a mission film in which something explodes every 5 minutes or be it an 80 minute film about a giant shark loose in the canals of Venice. Now I understand that there is no comparison between the three bar an entertainment factor, if the film can hold my attention and entertain me for its duration it's done it's job. While I won't spend weeks pondering the meaning on the latter films I will reflect back on the former though I do understand that people read far too much into films often when there is nothing there.

I have listened to people talk at length about the ending of the Searchers and the reason Ethan doesn't stay with them is because he is sexually attracted to his niece and will rape her if he stays or how the film Double Indemnity is about two gay men who are afraid to come out to one another till the last scene or how Romero repeatedly challenged society with his films. Complete and utter crap for the most part, people who fancy themselves intellectuals can read anything they want into a film, one could argue for example that the film Crank was an exploration of American attitudes toward foreigners and how Jason Statham's Character represents the asexual nature of modern man.

People talk about the way the light is used in a shot means so much more, how it delves deep into the character when in reality it was a complete fluke that the director thought looked nice. To me it is the people who indulge in length with the above who are snobs, the same people who will turn up their nose when you say you enjoyed the Death Race remake.

I'm not a film snob but rather a lover of film in all it's guises, I will debate the meaning behind shots and all that jazz with you but I refuse to listen to you when you try to convince me that the Searchers is really about incest and rape.

Edit: I should add that I am constantly called a film snob which I can never understand, though the last person to call me it did so as a result of me calling Seven Samurai the greatest action film ever made.

L'prof

Deleted User wrote: »

Edit: I should add that I am constantly called a film snob which I can never understand, though the last person to call me it did so as a result of me calling Seven Samurai the greatest action film ever made.

The thing is, I don't think any two people would see eye to eye on their definition of a film snob.

L'prof

L'prof wrote: »

The thing is, I don't think any two people would see eye to eye on their definition of a film snob.

I think though that we can all agree that this man is perhaps the most famous film snob around:

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Deleted User wrote: »

I think though that we can all agree that this man is perhaps the most famous film snob around:

and he's all the more awesome for it

Renn

How's he awesome when he compares every movie released to The Exorcist? The guy has been spouting the same crap for the last few years. Admittedly when I first heard his podcast I thought it was funny etc but after a few I realised that this guy just loves the sound of his own voice. Every show is the exact same...they'll do a top 10 list for the week and he'll have seen half of them...he'll say hello to Jason Isaacs...he'll say Orlando Bland (lolzzzzzzzz)...and people will text in changing Simon and Mark to something extremely witty like Harold and Maude. And you won't have an email read out if you don't sign it with your degree in baloney.

Rant over.

jaykhunter

I think the definition of a film snob is someone that looks down on a movie that you like.

Try not to get hung up about it; being passionate about films is a great thing. Fortunately or not, it's a never-ending hunger to be gratified by the next film; with expectations and the level for 'enjoyable' being raised every time you see a movie. Sure everyone has prejudices, not limited to film; but from the everyday, to watches, types of bread, games consoles, choice of putter.... Your (nameless, faceless) detractor will invariably use it to denigrate your opinion. It's the vice of wanting badly to talk in depth about any film you want to; but ya gotta do it bearing in mind it's the internet, where there's separation of body and opinion.

If your real-life friends are calling you a film-snob; best either see movies alone, or with a film club with people of a similar persuasion. Or just don't discuss it with such a passion; accept that others don't view it as deeply or as seriously as you do.

Sure I'm a film snob; I'd wager that anyone with a strong opinion on films is a snob of some degree (i.e. they know what they like and what they don't); take me; i watch a lot of horror films, but i don't care for slashers and what they do. If I were to harangue people about why slashers suck, i'd be a film snob. But another film snob would look down on me for liking horror films.......a lovely circle of condescension!

Bottom line, you're passionate about films, and that's wonderful. You've been blessed/cursed to really like this medium. If someone can't respectfully disagree with your PoV then don't pay attention to their opinion.

Renn

i watch a lot of horror films, but i don't care for slashers and what they do. If I were to harangue people about why slashers suck, i'd be a film snob.

Hardly. Once you don't go down the 'it's a f*cking piece of sh*t' route then it's all fair game. Doesn't mean you're a snob if you back up your thoughts with a decent argument.

titan18

Ya, I've been called a film snob, don't understand why though. It seems to happen when I recommend some foreign film to people but I still enjoyed Transformers 2 and Avatar, but I shut off my brain for as long as possible in both( much harder to do with Transformer 2 though).

I would criticize a film that I haven't seen but through reviews/trailers/ads etc, you can identify the generic slasher/action/romcom film, and once you've seen one of those films you've seen them all.

Handsome Bob

I think with any critic, the issue of whether you are a snob or not is not about your opinions but your attitude towards people.

Let's take the indignation levelled at you for criticising Avatar. Were people getting annoyed because they were too sensitive or were the getting annoyed because you came off as patronising? There's a big difference between being critical of a film and being critical of the people who like the film.

So, if it is just a simple case of people being too sensitive then I wouldn't worry about people calling you a film snob.

Your Airbag

I get this all the time also, have no time for the toliet humour comedies and all my friends lovem, all the Will Ferrell/Ben Stiller junk.

Some action filme are ok as long as the action is complimented by a good script but give me character development and clever dialouge any day.

When I recommend fils like Notes on a Scandal, Revolutionary Road and other films in that vein I usually get laughed at. I love foriegn films too.

jeffreylebowski

I think this is an interesting subject.

Most of what I might have wanted to say about it has already been said here, but I'll go over a couple of things.

I think lz5by5 hit the nail on the head when he said it's about your attitude to the person who likes the film, more than the film itself. I like all kinds of films and I really enjoy the "overthinking" part where you read into things and talk about what they might mean. I don't think that makes me a snob, I don't think I've ever been called a film snob and if someone called me one because of the above I'd laugh it off pretty comfortably. I definitely don't feel a strong need to knock films that other people like, I don't care that millions of people went to see Transformers 2. Sometimes films rub me the wrong way somehow and have something about them I find nasty or mean-spirited and I'll be quite critical of them, but I would never dream of criticizing the person I'm talking to for liking them.

Yes, I like some films and don't like others but I think I'm fairly open to different types of film. That's the one nugget I think makes me feel pretty secure against snobbery accusations.

There were a couple of things I saw here that I didn't agree with so much too, nothing catastrophic but worth mentioning I think.

Leave your brain at the door: why should that be necessary? Why can't an intelligent person enjoy something that isn't high brow without feeling they're doing something wrong, or that they have to temporarily lobotomize themself?
I think we lose a lot of enjoyment in things because we think ourselves around in circles rather than just enjoying the spectacle, or the thrill, or whatever drew us to the movie in question. (And I say this as a self-confessed overthinker) I just use different criteria to evaluate different films.

Another thing I can't stand, the idea that films being "mere entertainment" is somehow a bad thing, as though entertaining me should be way down on a film's list of priorities. By that rationale a film that just sets out to be the most entertaining film it can be, is somehow lacking validity or substance. Tell that to Howard Hawks.

As for Johnny Ultimate, you seem like you really dig movies. That's cool, so long as you're a nice guy about it nobody has the right to call you a snob.

Galvasean

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Let's take the indignation levelled at you for criticising Avatar. Were people getting annoyed because they were too sensitive or were the getting annoyed because you came off as patronising? There's a big difference between being critical of a film and being critical of the people who like the film.

So, if it is just a simple case of people being too sensitive then I wouldn't worry about people calling you a film snob.

I'd say a lot of people's train of thought went:
It's not the most clever film but I like it -> He doesn't like it, probably because it's a bit stupid -> Ergo, he thinks I'm stupid -> ZOMG offense! :eek:

Ridley

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I think with any critic, the issue of whether you are a snob or not is not about your opinions but your attitude towards people.

Let's take the indignation levelled at you for criticising Avatar. Were people getting annoyed because they were too sensitive or were the getting annoyed because you came off as patronising? There's a big difference between being critical of a film and being critical of the people who like the film.

So, if it is just a simple case of people being too sensitive then I wouldn't worry about people calling you a film snob.

O' course, it could also be seen as: [Film X] is popular + you don't like [Film X] = you don't like [Film X] because it's popular.

Handsome Bob

Ridley wrote: »

O' course, it could also be seen as: [Film X] is popular + you don't like [Film X] = you don't like [Film X] because it's popular.

The Dark Knight would be an example of that. Some of the worst reasons I've ever heard for disliking a film.

Galvasean

Indeed, some of the negative reviews of the Dark Knight practicaly screamed, "Look at me, I'm different!!!!!"
No, just wrong :P

johnny_ultimate

Galvasean wrote: »

Indeed, some of the negative reviews of the Dark Knight practicaly screamed, "Look at me, I'm different!!!!!"
No, just wrong :P

"The Dark Knight is a wonderful film in all regards, but the editing in the car chase sequence was a little choppy. 2/5"

There is a significant difference between actually criticising a film and just trying to be different. My brother always accuses me of not liking a film because it's popular :P I'd only criticise a movie if I had valid criticisms to back it up, the whole just trying to be different thing is really annoying. Cosmo Landesman in the Sunday Times is the absolute worst for this. He gives pretty much every film a negative review on the flimsiest of perceived criticisms.

Handsome Bob

Galvasean wrote: »

Indeed, some of the negative reviews of the Dark Knight practicaly screamed, "Look at me, I'm different!!!!!"
No, just wrong :P

I once heard the criticism that the dialogue was too perfect. Well **** me, how dare David Goyer and Jonah Nolan write a quality and compelling script.

rovert

For the boat sequence alone -*****