post movies that apply to this chart. obvious ones first: >The

>>87294193
>fight club

>>87294193

I'm confused. What exactly is this graph measuring?

>>87294256
Clever and enjoyable to start off with, then it becomes dumb and unenjoyable in the middle, ending with being clever and enjoyable again.

>>87294256
A movie that follows this chart would be like this:

>people of low intelligence (or understanding of the art of film) will like the movie because of its surface level qualities like having good action, cool characters etc

>people of medium intelligence will expect something more from the movie than the others, and thus dont like it

>people of high intelligence have the capabilities to see the hidden meaning, little things in the cinematography, references etc. etc. and thus having a deeper understanding and enjoyment of the movie again

>>87294345
that doesnt make sense since "intelligence" is the x-axis

>>87294193
Star Wars

>>87294256
Lol wut
you cant read a very basic graph?

>>87294345
no it's the perception of the movie based off the viewers intelligence

low iq people like you enjoy these films the same as me

>>87294461

I dont understand what the intelligence is measuring. The intelligence of the movie, or the intelligence of the people watching?

>>87294345
>>87294256
Brainlets detected

>>87294345
You don't know how to read graphs, do you?
The Intelligence axis is only increasing when you go from left to the right, the only thing that graph shows it the change of Enjoyment while Intelligence is increasing. So it's utterly retarded.

>>87294485
you voted for drumpf.

Mortal Kombat

>>87294193
This is a terrible graph.

>>87294499

its a legitimate question.

>>87294193
BvS

avatar is shit for anybody

Blade Runner

bump
i think theres a lot more discussion to be had here

>>87294193
CLEARY
SPRING BREAKERS

>>87294256

Graph is unclear. I took it to mean that both morons and intelligent people would find it enjoyable, but that people 'in the middle' wouldn't.

>>87294193
graph unclear. can we have parametrics?

>>87294193
Why Avatar?

>>87294193
Twin Peaks: The Return

>>87294193
>>87294345
if that is what the graph is suppose to measure then the graph is wrong

What the graph is saying is that the movie is enjoyable for people that are either too smart or too dumb.

>>87294369
>The pest

>>87294369
Sticky this please

Also /thread

>>87294256
>What exactly is this graph measuring?
How much of a snowflake hipster faggot OP is.

>>87294485
Can a movie have enjoyment?

>>87300660
>Can a movie have enjoyment?
Not as long as white CIS scum males exists.

>>87300058
OP here. I chose Avatar to be one of my examples because it is loved by many of my friends that just casually watch movies to entertain themselves. And that part of my enjoys it for that too, it has a cool world, cool creatures and i think the effects are really good. Some other friends that i would describe as "wannabe movie critics" hate it because of the simple plot, 1-dimensional characters etc.

What I think they dont get is: the movie is symbolic for a huge hollywood blockbuster like that. One dimensional characters dont make a movie bad, neither does a simple plot. Also theres the technical aspect: it pushed CGI and 3D a lot further, you can also view it as a very impressive tech demo.

>>87300626
>snowflake hipster faggot
>examples are some of the most popular movies of all time

>>87294193
can some explain this chart with the social network?

File: mdnsjg3121.jpg (36KB, 860x580px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 860x580px

I have a different one than OP's.
Post films that apply to pic related. Call them slow-burners or just long build-ups that pay off. Anything that you think applies, really.

>>87294193
>haha im so smart for being a contrarian/pseud
The superiority complex levels are through the fucking roof

>>87301815
Jaws

>>87301815
vvitch

>>87294193
Any porn scene ever

>>87301595
there's nothing to explain; the graph is an arbitrary waste of everybody's time. just enjoy whatever you want. there's no sense worrying whether some internet autist thinks you're a pleb for unironically enjoying the social network (or worrying about some normie calling you elitist for disliking it).

>>87302874
I don't worry about it, just curious.

I've seen it once. I didn't like it. I didn't see why everyone was praising it. Also I hate facebook.

>>87300450
Sticky yourself.

Rick and North
>not a movie
Yeah but still applies

>>87302970
yeah, i didn't love it either. there is definitely an aesthetic to it though. soundtrack is p chill

>>87294369
The graph is bullshit but there still might be something to this idea. Normies aka the middle group seem to dislike good movies for some trivial reasons, such as not being realistic enough. Intelligent viewers understand movies are artistic visions and don't judge them based on petty reasons but as an art form

>>87304689
t. pseudo-intellectual

Every Tarantino film