If Spawn counts as a mediocre movie with good music, then you’d think Flash Gordon would be in the same category. But I don’t think either of those movies are mediocre.
I mean, cool, I fucking loved it, but let’s be real that outside of John leguizamo, the performances were mid. And it had almost no lasting impact. It’s just kind of an “oh yeah that was a movie wasn’t it” mid 90s comic book schlock.
But that album was like, actually peak 90s metal/ hardcore.
I might have a strange definition of mediocre, but basically, I think that if I had seen the movie once, and then I decide it’s worth watching again, then somehow it must not be mediocre. I’ve seen Spawn several times.
I think “mediocre” in this context would be mediocre to most people. Rather than you specifically. At least, that’s why I added some brackets explaining my Tron: Legacy answer in this post. (I personally don’t think it’s mediocre but imagine most did.)
I think “mediocre” in this context would be mediocre to most people.
I think you cannot ask about something subjective without getting people’s personal opinions. If you ask about an aspect of a mediocre thing, then you can expect at least some debate about what counts as mediocre, and probably none of the people’s answers will be correct.
For me, a “mediocre” movie would be something that I would only watch again if a friend wanted to watch it, but if it was just an option and I got to choose, I’d never choose it. But if it was just “on”, I might not change the channel. Let’s see, like The Rock directed by Michael Bay.
And then there are “bad” movies that I wouldn’t watch even if I had a friend who wanted to see it, like any other Michael Bay movie that I’ve seen. Armageddon had pretty good music, but it wasn’t mediocre. It was bad.
Spawn movie.
If Spawn counts as a mediocre movie with good music, then you’d think Flash Gordon would be in the same category. But I don’t think either of those movies are mediocre.
I mean, cool, I fucking loved it, but let’s be real that outside of John leguizamo, the performances were mid. And it had almost no lasting impact. It’s just kind of an “oh yeah that was a movie wasn’t it” mid 90s comic book schlock.
But that album was like, actually peak 90s metal/ hardcore.
I might have a strange definition of mediocre, but basically, I think that if I had seen the movie once, and then I decide it’s worth watching again, then somehow it must not be mediocre. I’ve seen Spawn several times.
I think “mediocre” in this context would be mediocre to most people. Rather than you specifically. At least, that’s why I added some brackets explaining my Tron: Legacy answer in this post. (I personally don’t think it’s mediocre but imagine most did.)
I think you cannot ask about something subjective without getting people’s personal opinions. If you ask about an aspect of a mediocre thing, then you can expect at least some debate about what counts as mediocre, and probably none of the people’s answers will be correct.
For me, a “mediocre” movie would be something that I would only watch again if a friend wanted to watch it, but if it was just an option and I got to choose, I’d never choose it. But if it was just “on”, I might not change the channel. Let’s see, like The Rock directed by Michael Bay.
And then there are “bad” movies that I wouldn’t watch even if I had a friend who wanted to see it, like any other Michael Bay movie that I’ve seen. Armageddon had pretty good music, but it wasn’t mediocre. It was bad.
/shrug, you do you. I’m just leading a horse to water. But I cannot fill a cup which is already full.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7SedYMP-PA&list=PL2ztHm4WvPfseLj_dW0gXACogcfwUXpjV