Obsession (new movie)

For starters, where do you think name-calling ranks among methods of convincing others of your viewpoint?

One last time for those in the cheap seats...

Horror is a genre that appeals to specific tastes. People who don't care for it are not likely to go to the film. People who do care for it are likely to go to the film.

Polling people who go to such a film and getting a high positive score is no indication that it's a without question a good film. The results show just that people who go to horror movies liked it.

What about that is so hard to understand?

Aren't people saying it's getting higher scores than other horror films? So even if horror films always get high scores because only fans see them (debatable), this is getting higher scores than average. I feel like you know what people are saying, but are ignoring it for some reason.
 
I saw it, When I saw it was Blumhouse my expectations dropped a bit but it turned out to be a good movie. I would give it a solid 7 but Inde Navarrette's performance bumped it up to an 8-8.5
Both leads are pretty incredible. It's a tight rope to walk without it coming off incredibly over-acting or cheesey...and they don't...at all.
 
For "Obsession"?

Probably because the list was created 7 years ago and modified 6 years ago.
No, for any of them. They put the metascore but don't show you the supposed inflated rotten tomatoes score. Maybe they're right but show the scores ffs.
 
For starters, where do you think name-calling ranks among methods of convincing others of your viewpoint?

One last time for those in the cheap seats...

Horror is a genre that appeals to specific tastes. People who don't care for it are not likely to go to the film. People who do care for it are likely to go to the film.

Polling people who go to such a film and getting a high positive score is no indication that it's a without question a good film. The results show just that people who go to horror movies liked it.

What about that is so hard to understand?
I went back and reread my post, and then reread it again. I'm not seeing any name-calling. I legitimately am wondering if you can't understand what people are saying, or if you're just arguing for fun.
 
I went back and reread my post, and then reread it again. I'm not seeing any name-calling. I legitimately am wondering if you can't understand what people are saying, or if you're just arguing for fun.

I think when you asked if he was being purposefully obtuse, he took that as name-calling.
 
Aren't people saying it's getting higher scores than other horror films?

Of course. But what does that matter?

So even if horror films always get high scores because only fans see them (debatable), this is getting higher scores than average. I feel like you know what people are saying, but are ignoring it for some reason.

Not ignoring, just trying to point out that the prettiest cow in the pasture may not even be a good cow when compared with other animals in other pastures.

I know, I know, how dare I insult a genre known for mediocrity by refusing to kowtow to opinions about an above-average film in the genre?

Grab your chainsaws.

I'll go hide in the basement.
 
I went back and reread my post, and then reread it again. I'm not seeing any name-calling. I legitimately am wondering if you can't understand what people are saying, or if you're just arguing for fun.

"obtuse" is not a positive epithet.

Asking someone if he's being obtuse on purpose is an insult, however mitigated you think the comment is. What's more, implying that your interlocutor is incapable of understanding is just words, not a reasoned argument.

Ad hominem may make the person using it feel better, but it's never useful if intended to convince the person that you are right. In fact, it does pretty much the opposite.

I understand what the movie's defenders are saying. That doesn't mean that I agree, nor that I have to.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tailg8er
"obtuse" is not a positive epithet.

Asking someone if he's being obtuse on purpose is an insult, however mitigated you think the comment is. What's more, implying that your interlocutor is incapable of understanding is just words, not a reasoned argument.

Ad hominem may make the person using it feel better, but it's never useful if intended to convince the person that you are right. In fact, it does pretty much the opposite.

I understand what the movie's defenders are saying. That doesn't mean that I agree, nor that I have to.

I provided a reasoned argument that explained why your church-goers analogy doesn't hold up. In fact, all of your analogies don't hold up, which is why I questioned if you were just being argumentative.

Your library analogy - Instead of comparing library kids to all other kids, a correct analogy would have been comparing how polite those library kids were compared to OTHER library kids.

Your foreign film analogy - Instead of comparing how you rate foreign films to how other people rate foreign films, a correct analogy would have been comparing how you rated one foreign film compared to how you rated other foreign films.

I already commented on your church-goers analogy.

If you truly understood what the movie's defenders were saying, you would know that there is nothing to agree or disagree with. They are simply stating that it is receiving extremely high marks compared to other horror movies.
 
So anyway. The movie is really good.
My bad. I derailed it with what I felt was a fairly self evident point. I do think it looks interesting and is certainly a movie that's generating a lot of buzz. It's why I checked out the thread. The struggles young men are having in the dating scene and the sense that they are owed the affections of women without doing any of the work is definitely fertile territory for social commentary. Anyone who has listened to Scott Galloway talk about the subject of young men struggling with masculinity has heard him discuss this subject. I doubt I'll make it to the theater to see it but something I want to check out at some point.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: dahliaclone
My bad. I derailed it with what I felt was a fairly self evident point. I do think it looks interesting and is certainly a movie that's generating a lot of buzz. It's why I checked out the thread. The struggles young men are having in the dating scene and the sense that they are owed the affections of women without doing any of the work is definitely fertile territory for social commentary. Anyone who has listened to Scott Galloway talk about the subject of young men struggling with masculinity has heard him discuss this subject. I doubt I'll make it to the theater to see it but something I want to check out at some point.
hahah my 'so anyway' post was all in jest. no apology needed at all and appreciate your comments
 
Thanks for the review, @dahliaclone.

My question: If people in the audience are paying the high ticket price to go, they are unlikely to say that a movie is poor, aren't they?

Personally, I would never pay to see a horror movie. You can get real-life horror on a daily basis just by reading the news (or the you-know-who files).

Does the film at least not go schlocky at the end? That was my major complaint with "The Substance".
As someone that is a fan of horror I have no problem rating a movie poorly whether I saw it in the theater or not. In fact I think I am more critical of a horror movie. There have been plenty of times when I have watched a movie and told people not to bother.

In response to your question, No the ending is not schlocky. I agree about The Substance. The first 2 acts were great and it fell apart in the third act.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dahliaclone
As someone that is a fan of horror I have no problem rating a movie poorly whether I saw it in the theater or not. In fact I think I am more critical of a horror movie. There have been plenty of times when I have watched a movie and told people not to bother.

In response to your question, No the ending is not schlocky. I agree about The Substance. The first 2 acts were great and it fell apart in the third act.
I have seen a lot of people compare it to Hereditary. Not in terms of topic or themes but just a sort of new visionary horror director and while not the same topic, both topics very dark. I personally loathe Hereditary. Loved everything until the last ten minutes then just ruined.

Obsession I find quite good/great. I find myself thinking about it a couple of times a day. It's just a really well-made, well acted horror flick. Which I very much appreciate.
 
Just for the record:




and

"Obsession is messed up. Up-and-coming writer and director Curry Barker knows his craft, obviously, but he’s used his considerable talents to tell a truly horrific, off-putting story that will be difficult to shake. It unfurls with the grace of a sledgehammer and just keeps pounding.

I realize that, for many horror aficionados, all that is a selling point. But if I had a wish in my back pocket that wouldn’t ultimately lead to terror and death, I might wish that this movie had never been made. Or, at least, that I didn’t have to review it." from

 
Just for the record:




and

"Obsession is messed up. Up-and-coming writer and director Curry Barker knows his craft, obviously, but he’s used his considerable talents to tell a truly horrific, off-putting story that will be difficult to shake. It unfurls with the grace of a sledgehammer and just keeps pounding.

I realize that, for many horror aficionados, all that is a selling point. But if I had a wish in my back pocket that wouldn’t ultimately lead to terror and death, I might wish that this movie had never been made. Or, at least, that I didn’t have to review it." from


Do you know how percentages work? If 95% of people like something, that means 5% of people don't like it. Just because you highlight the 5% doesn't mean that the 95% are wrong.

You can find bad reviews for every single film ever made.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Tailg8er
Just for the record:




and

"Obsession is messed up. Up-and-coming writer and director Curry Barker knows his craft, obviously, but he’s used his considerable talents to tell a truly horrific, off-putting story that will be difficult to shake. It unfurls with the grace of a sledgehammer and just keeps pounding.

I realize that, for many horror aficionados, all that is a selling point. But if I had a wish in my back pocket that wouldn’t ultimately lead to terror and death, I might wish that this movie had never been made. Or, at least, that I didn’t have to review it." from


Linking a few negative reviews proves...what exactly? Using Plugged In, a site literally run by a conservative Christian ministry to warn parents about scary movies, as a source is an incredible take. And another link is a....Reddit post? Dude.

You’re trying far too hard to look right, but all you're doing is being cringey. Move on.
 
Just for the record:

I'm not really sure what to make of this review. The author doesn't like a horror movie because it has the elements of a horror movie.
A horror movie is supposed to make you uncomfortable. It's supposed to have elements that make you feel icky. If not you have a PG13 movie designed for 13 year olds that has a bunch of jump scares and nothing else.
There are plenty of horror films that people like that I don't find appealing. Hell, I think The Shining sucked yet many people consider it some sort of masterpiece. Horror is an interesting genre that has many subgenres.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tailg8er