This is the perfect parody of that one freak here who says these

types*
whoops

>>93301797
Most people aren't telling you that you're wrong for enjoying something, you dunce.
They're telling you that your belief that it is good is incorrect.

>>93302077
You didn't read the image.
I knew someone was going to pull out the
>enjoy=/=good
But the image addressees this.

>>93302094
There's no shame in enjoying something bad, anon.

No, the thing about every Snyder praise thread is the people don't say "I enjoyed the work" they say "the work was magnificently made and you are all too dumb to understand why it was so great".

>>93302094
>You didn't read the image.
I read the article back when I was in high school. At no point does it poke fun at discussion over quality. It's satire of people who insist others are "wrong" for liking things and they should instead enjoy other things.

>>93302156
Again though, you're just shitposting. The image addresses the
>enjoy=/=good
thing, which is why I posted it.
And I think you know that. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

No one hates you because you like Snyder, everyone hates because you're a brain dead /tv/ cancerposter.

The persecution complex is a dead giveaway.

>>93302183
see
>>93302094

The image says
>he believes his appreciation of the thing to be a matter of personal subjective taste
This is not talking about him enjoying it only. It is talking about him thinking that X thing is subjectively good.

>>93302156
Really? That's good because I sure do enjoy your mom.

>>93302214
>The persecution complex is a dead giveaway.

Fucking this.

This is already enough for me to hate you OP and want to be away from you. I imagine that the same mus>>93302214
t happen in your real life too.

>>93302214
>first lines persecutes
>second line implies no persecution

really made me think

>>93302243
see
>>93302259

>>93302233
Appreciation and quality aren't the same thing. I have a fondness and appreciation for Catdog, but I know it was pretty mediocre overall.

You're either a moron or this is 10/10 bait.

>>93302156
Nothing is black and white. A person liking something will personally believe it to be good. Liking a bad movie for the purposes of laughing at its unintentional mistakes is not the same as liking it for what it's supposed to be. Liking the Resident Evil movies for what they are means you think they're good at something.

File: Screen Shot 2017-06-18 at 7.27.49 PM.png (36KB, 578x155px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 578x155px

>>93302276
>Appreciation and quality aren't the same thing.
It's both enjoyment and believed quality.

>>93302233
If they said "I enjoy the thing" then they wouldn't be wrong. But that's not what they are saying, they are saying they are smarter than people that didn't enjoy it and that makes them wrong.

>>93302296
>A person liking something will personally believe it to be good.
Are we living in a society filled with people so stupid that they can't mentally distinguish between their personal preferences and critical analysis?

File: Jonathan Kent MoS.png (57KB, 1422x181px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1422x181px

>>93302306
I think they are though. AT LEAST the people who say that Pa Kent is pro child murder and stupid stuff like that.

>>93302302
You can appreciate something without thinking it's good. I'm sorry you have to actually be told this.

>>93302366
>You can appreciate something without thinking it's good.
But appreciation also can mean that one thinks that something is good.
As my image shows.

>>93302376
Why do you think an image proves anything?

>>93302395
>why do you think the english language proves anything
gg

>>93301797
Liking Snyder's work doesn't mean you're wrong, it just means you are more likely than most to be a low-IQ pleb.

It's like people who like Michael Bay movies. I don't trust them to be highly functional members of society, but I don't think they're wrong for being that way. That was just the way they were born.

>>93302376
And screen can mean to show OR conceal. What a world!

Are you done playing semantics, or are you going to keep dragging this out for (You)s?

>>93302448
>And screen can mean to show OR conceal.
This means that we are both right, however since you seem to be trying to win the argument, I am forced to assume that you are somehow thinking that it only makes you right.

>>93302333
You're misunderstanding me though. People have varying perceptions. Things like Fast and Furious are popular for a reason. Most people can compartmentalize and use suspension of disbelief to enjoy something.

I realize something that is shot poorly or acted poorly is a bad movie but big blockbuster movies usually do competent jobs of being good films. Otherwise an enjoyable plot makes for a legitimately good movie.

>>93302428
>I don't trust them to be highly functional members of society
But Michael Bay likes his movies, and he's extremely successful.

>>93302473
>I realize something that is shot poorly or acted poorly is a bad movie
Isn't this subjective too?
The end goal of a movie is to be enjoyed.
If something is enjoyed, doesn't that mean that it is a good movie?

The technical rules and guidelines of cinema are only there to ensure enjoyment in the first place.

>>93302516
>The technical rules and guidelines of cinema are only there to ensure enjoyment in the first place.
For blockbusters, this is the bare minimum. For film? Nah. That's not even true with fiction in general.

>>93302763
I disagree. The end goal of knowledge is enjoyment/contentment/betterment of life/positive change.