posted
I didn't want to hijack that thread, since so many people seemed eager to share their "litmus test movies." But I do want to ask this question: is this really a fair indicator of common interest?
For instance, there's Ender's Game. I assume every one of you at least liked it somewhat, or you wouldn't be here. And yet I think it's fair to say that we all liked EG for different reasons. Yeah, I'd say all of us. I don't think two of us read the same book. I mean, our readings probably had enough in common to become the foundation for a pretty solid community, but there are definitely some of you with whom I have practically nothing in common.
Okay, you say. How can you base a whole "litmus test" on one book or one movie? Well, you can't. So you make your list longer, say three to five, and pretty soon, everybody's list looks different. If you don't believe me, look at the Litmus Test thread. No two posts were the same. Based on that, and on some of the strong "if you don't like this movie, I'm sure we can't get along" and "if you don't like this movie, I don't know what's wrong with you" sort of comments, none of us would get along very well. Few of you would like me at all ( maybe none of you do! j/k).
Besides which, there are some movies that just about everybody likes. If they count as litmus test movies, they sort more into two categories than in to smaller groups. For instance, I'd say there's a solid enough following for LotR that one could divide the nation into people who liked it and people who didn't. That works, I guess. Though I probably wouldn't get along very well with someone who only liked it for the epic battles, since I only tolerated those for the "good stuff" like Rivendell and Sam Gamgee and Gollum.
Some of you had solid reasons for using movies to "test" people, especially dates. For instance, Speed:
quote:When I was dating, I used to show girls A Fish Called Wanda. It may be the funniest movie ever made (at least in the top 5), and while it's not as shocking as, say, Pulp Fiction or something, it's just dirty enough that if a girl likes it, it means she's not too good for me. When a girl likes that type of humour and isn't put off by a little smut, it's a good indication she's on my wavelength. Needless to say, my wife passed that test with flying colours.
You know, that's fair. I'd have failed that test, but then, I'd be glad to know right off that I failed so both of us could move on to other people.
But really, would you ever say to someone, "You don't like The Princess Bride? I'm sorry, we can't be friends."
Or maybe I'm just delving too deep into something that was light and fluffy and not supposed to be heavy at all. Sorry if that's the case. Posts: 1903 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I only feel it works in a positive sense. That if someone likes these things, then I know for sure I will like that person. I don't assign too much meaning to people not liking something I like. Everyone has their own tastes. Just because they can't appreciate something great doesn't mean I will hold it against them. I will just be a bit sad, maybe, that they can't get that particular enjoyment.
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
But you weren't there when I tried to watch "Raising Arizona" with the woman who had been my bosom pal throughout college. She said she thought it was stupid, and I guess she just couldn't relate to the characters for some reason. Maybe I have the same problem with "You've got Mail". I also really hated "Sleepless in Seattle". I think they both sent really bad messages about how to obtain happiness in life. But I did like "Serendipity", which is not that disimilar in terms of its treatment of destiny.
Maybe I relate to Meg Ryan too much. Maybe I think Tom Hanks doesn't deserve her. Whereas for Kate Beckinsale, John Cusack is really a pretty good catch. Maybe I conceal a secret pain that is aggravated to no end by some mysterious trigger that I can't place. Maybe that's why my friend didn't like "Raising Arizona". So I guess you (Ruth) would be right about that one.
Edit: typo
And I may as well add: I think it goes beyond fluff when one asks oneself "why do I feel that way about it?" I mean, how much fluffier can a movie get than "Strange Brew", and yet my seeing it (in the theater) is very revelatory about my upbringing. "Lethal Weapon 3" was an issue because my friends (we were college freshmen) decided to sneak into the theater. It actually goes beyond that, we rented "Without a Clue" because I didn't want to watch an R rated movie and all my friends decided to leave and not only see an R rated movie, but jump the gates. I don't think we ever had that argument again. So what does it say that I later did see that movie when my husband rented it? Well, now I'll have to think about that one.
posted
"It's a Wonderful Life" was a great litmus test for me (or has this particular movie been beaten to death in the original "Litmus Test" thread?)
I wound up watching it with my girlfriend (at the time) after college, and while I was bawling like a baby (or a statue of the Madonna somewhere in Columbia, South America--except for the blood thing), she just sat there and looked at me as if I had two heads.
Needless to say, she is NOT my wife. My wife and I start crying 30 seconds after the opening credits start to roll, just thinking about all the crying we'll be doing once the film starts hitting its stride.
--Steve
quote:Clarence, George bailey is about to throw out God's most precious gift...
Like that, Brinestone? Yeah, that would be rather extreme, I agree. To me, litmus test movies (or books, or what have you) are much more like an actual litmus test -- not a yes/no, but a test that gives many possible results.
A litmus test movie is useful to me no so much to rule people out, but to give me a read on them. So just liking or not liking a movie is only part of the question. pooka's analysis of why she disliked Sleepless was far more interesting than the simple fact that she dislikes it.
And even though I don't disagree with her reasons, I like the movie anyway -- go figure!
posted
Movies are works of art. They are often crass commercial works of art, but that doesn't make them not art. Except for Wild Wild West. If you thought Wild Wild West was a great film, you should be flogged with uncooked lasagne noodles.
Maybe my love of the movies is because my father came from China, and to him movies were one of the magical and beautiful things about America. So I take it a little too seriously, I guess. I'm more of a deep reader than a wide reader, so I wouldn't be able to gauge people by the books they read.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's good to have common interests, but too often we forget about the concept of complementary personalities.
Frankly, all I watch are chick flicks and foreign films. But Do I look for a man who loves Pride & Prejudice as much as I do? Um, no.
But I do tend to spend the most time with the people who will watch weird French movies with me and less time with the people who invite me over to watch Rush Hour 2, The Ring, and XXX. It's just not gonna happen. I can still be friends with them, but not the type of friends I hang out with until 3 in the morning.
But this is all indicative of our other similarities. The movies are neither here nor there. I don't these people would have much fun doing something with me with or without the foreign films.
Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess the reason I asked the question was because I have somewhat strange taste in movies. Oh yeah, I loved The Matrix. I'm dying to see RotK. I saw Gattaca and liked it, but I wouldn't see it again. I liked Raising Arizona, and I think that if I saw it again, I'd like it even more.
But these aren't the movies I define myself by. They're fun to watch, but they're not the ones I want to watch over and over.
So if movies betray common interest, does that mean I'm really that bizarre?
But then, I guess I've always been one of a few really close friends. Maybe that's why. Now look, this thread has become narcissistic. *throws up hands*
posted
<laughs> Hobbes, I had that exact same thought. I've not even seen the movie, or heard what it is about, but was sure it had to be a DNA sequence from the title, and my very first thought when I saw that was "but there's no 'i' base". Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't post on the litmus test thread for those very same reasons, Brinestone. I don't believe in them.
For example, Andrew loves Star Trek and Monty Python and I don't like them. I love movies (and t.v. shows) with makeovers and Andrew would rather see Rob Schneider as a stapler. My best friend Cara doesn't watch The Simpsons. I could go on and on.
Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not only is a litmus test not an on or off thing, it is also only one aspect of all matter. Melting point would be another, and atomic weight still another.
Being dismissive of the whole idea of litmus test movies is really not that different from being dismissive of an individual movie.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
maybe none of you do! j/k). ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
Well, now I'll have to think about that one.![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Yeah, that would be rather extreme, I agree. To me, litmus test movies (or books, or what have you) are much more like an actual litmus test -- not a yes/no, but a test that gives many possible results.![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
Thanks for the fix.
