In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
> (In reply to yeti)
>
> However much you didnt like it (Field of Dreams), it's still utterly absurd to call that one of the 'worst films ever'. Really, really, really absurd.
Well this is the thing. For example, many of Mr Chapell's "worst films ever" are films greatly loved by lots and lots of people who are really passionately into cinema.
I love Withnail and I, but not bothered about Taxi Driver. Burn After Reading is not a good Cohen Brothers film, but is still miles ahead of standard Hollywood dross.
I could name loads of films I happened not to enjoy, many of which would be classics that people who are into that type of thing will rave about.
The question is, is there such a thing as objectively bad? Without question, if there was such a thing, Withnail and I would not be it. I doubt Field of Dreams would be either (although, like combining a bottle of whisky with sedatives, it puts me in danger of vomiting in my sleep).
I suspect that there is some sort of measure of 'objective quality' which has got something to do with a 'justified consensus' (i.e. it is not simply box office figures, it matters what people say about the film in question) and can distinguish 'films I didn't like' from 'films that should not have been made because they diminish humanity'. And I think that some people have a firmer grasp of that measure than others.