Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaisos Erranon
Bullshit. If you have succeeded in creating any kind of strong emotion in your audience, even anger, and this is at least partially intended, then you have succeeded as a writer.
Frankly, I like endings that piss me off, because that way I know the writer isn't the type to compromise for the sake of pleasing everyone, which inevitably leads to bad writing.
It sounds like you're correlating artistic quality with commercial success. This is nothing more than a huge mistake.
Oh, and Inception was unintelligent, uninspired, unimaginative, and overall an even worse movie than Avatar. It's just a shameless attempt at making stupid people (read: the majority of moviegoers) feel smart, and it succeeded.
|
I haven't seen Inception, I just looked up reviews for it in response to the other post. I'm not arguing that commercial success is the judge of quality, since that often depends on advertising budgets and whatnot, but rather average audience reviews. You can have an audience of one person and be the best writer in the world if that one person loves it (and its also good in more objective ways, again this isn't the only criteria).
Inspiring emotions in your audience is a good thing, but you shouldn't be angry at the author. That's just meaningless. it could be argued that the writer is a good troll is this case.