Favorite and Best: Establishing Quality

Person #1: "You know what my favorite movie is? Hellraiser!"
Person #2: "That's a stupid movie. You know what the best movie ever is"?
Person #1: "Now that you've insulted my choice, I don't know if I care; but, go ahead"!
Person #2: "Texas Chainsaw Massacre"!
Person #1: "Original or remake"?
Person #2: "Remake! I don't watch movies from the stone age"!
Person #1: "Dude! The Original is Better"!

I can state with a degree of certainty that everyone has had a conversation similar in tone and topic, sometime in their lives. After getting caught in these situations one too many times, I reached a philosophical conclusion I want to share with you, my readers: we, as a society, bandy about the terms "favorite" and "best" without thinking about their implications. There is room in everyone's life for both terms, if we establish they do not mean the same thing, and to what each specifically refers.


The 1983 edition of Webster's Deluxe Unabridged Dictionary, defines "favorite" as, "a person or thing regarded with special favor, preference or affection": you like something or someone. There is nothing in this definition to suggest expertise or profound knowledge. You like something for personal reasons. A favorite is chosen because of a specific set of criterion which apply to the person selecting. These feelings and beliefs do not need to be justified to assert conviction.


The same dictionary defines the term "best" as, "the most excellent thing, condition, circumstance, action, etc.". To "excel" at something implies achievement. Some things in life are easy to judge for what they achieve. If two people line-up and run 100 yards, whoever reaches the finish line first covered the distance the fastest. This is an easy circumstance to judge, but many things in our lives are much more complex.


The presence of computers and endless TV shows, featuring hours of information, can convince the average individual, that they are more educated than they really are. It is one of the conceits of contemporary life.


A casually formed opinion does not require evidence to make it valid. This is what identifies it as a favorite. Many news pundits, reality show contestants and ordinary folks spout their opinions; and if they share them loudly or with seeming authority, we take their opinions as from an authority. We assume, even if the opinion is not a fact, it must be a well-reasoned one, from a credible source. This is not true.


So, what are we left with? Should everyone just keep their mouths shut and never express an opinion, unless they are an expert on the subject? I am suggesting that there are two kinds of opinions: "Favorites" and "Best". They divide themselves into 3 categories.

"Favorites" type #1 (casually formed opinions; no deep knowledge or expertise required):I am not an expert on horror films. I have not watched "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" nor do I have any plans to, in the near future. I have never seen a "Saw" film and have no desire to. Horror films form one specific subdivision of Film Studies. Bruce Kawin, my Film History professor, and one of the most respected in his field, wrote a serious, scholarly essay entitled, "The Mummy's Pool". I do not suggest by my ignorance of this subdivision of film studies that horror films are unworthy of study. I am simply not interested in studying them.


This does not mean I have never seen a horror film. I am a fan of James Whale and F. W. Murnau. I have seen the first three "Friday the 13th" films and the first four in the "Nightmare on Elm Street" series. It just so happens that I like Wes Craven's third entry in the series. As a result, I can never claim that "Dream Warriors" is the best horror film ever made, because I have not watched enough to make a judgment on quality. I do believe that this is one of my "favorite" horror films I have seen. No one has the right to disagree with that statement, because I do not expect it to be anyone else's favorite. This is the crux of the issue: if you expect people to agree with your likes and dislikes, you want homogeneity. Variety is not the spice of life: it is the meat and potatoes. If someone happens to list "Nightmare 3" as one of their favorite horror films, that is a happy coincidence. If someone wants to debate "Saw IV" is a better film, I respectfully decline, because I have not seen it.


The first step in respecting other people's beliefs lies in accepting the limitations in your own knowledge. If you don't like how limited your knowledge is, learn more. Simple. Knowing another person's favorites tells me less about how much another person knows, and more about what kind of person they are. If you love "The Hills Have Eyes", it does not mean you are a shallow person who dislikes thoughtful cinema: you enjoy the thrill of being shocked and have a fascination with the unknown. If you like bad horror films (Ed Wood, schlock 50's films), you probably have a very off-beat sense of humor. If you believe the only films you like are of the aforementioned category, believing no one will ever make a film you enjoy as much, we probably need to talk about your obsessive single-minded focus. I would also worry about their intellectual stability.

Anyway, "favorites" of this type are more symbolic descriptions of an individual's personality than about their worth as a person. If someone tells you they love "snuff films", they are worthy of your contempt. Watching and enjoying fake violence, without accepting it is fake, is a psychiatric condition, which we have pills for. Watching and enjoying fake violence, knowing it is fake, and enjoying the conventions of this particular genre is as healthy and as enjoyable as being a fan of romantic comedies, westerns or Franco-era surrealist cinema; and you do not need to be an expert to have an opinion. The trick is to know when you are not an expert, but merely an enthusiast. Nothing wrong with that!


"Favorites" type #2 (Knowledge and expertise gained and happily ignored):I have a degree in Film Theory from the University of Colorado at Boulder. When I tell friends and acquaintances this, I usually hear this statement: "It must have been so much fun to sit and watch movies all day and get a degree in it"! At thousands of dollars per semester, that is not bloody likely! I read dozens of books on film theory, film history and film production. I made simple student films; and, while I do not know how to generate CGI, the principles of filmmaking are exactly the same, whether you spend $200 or $200 million. I wrote many term papers, which demonstrated my understanding of film theory and where I presented some of my own theories for scrutiny. Taking all of my grades from every film class I completed, my overall GPA is 3.61. In other words, I know what I am talking about and can form cogent arguments about films and their affect on an audience, i.e. me.


Question: When I finished my degree, did I reject every film I had seen before my studies began; because, when they were analyzed, the were nothing more than trash dressed up with the golden tinsel of nostalgia?! Of course not. "Smokey and the Bandit" may not be a film of very high quality, but I still try to watch it once every few years, fondly remembering when, as a five year old boy, Burt Reynolds's laugh made me smile.


Some things defy expertise and knowledge. We like something, even when others tell us we shouldn't; and we know perfectly well what the reasons are. I have almost been driven to pull my hair out by the roots, because of the number of times I have encountered family, friends and total strangers, who have a disdain for expertise; as if it makes you forget who you are and pretend you are something you are not. This is all nonsense, and partially jealousy. Expertise does not beget snobbery and the abandonment of "roots", unless the person acquiring knowledge wants to abandon those "principals". Expertise merely brings the ability to explain yourself more clearly, and in greater detail. For some people, the end of school marked the end of learning, or at least pressurized learning, with demands to prove yourself to others. The truth is, the day we stop learning is when we die...literally. Whether you consciously engage in your own learning or not will determine how knowledge affects you.


Patricia Hitchcock once claimed that two of her father's favorite movies were "Smokey and the Bandit" and "Benji". Alfred Hitchcock, the greatest filmmaker of the 20th century, liked Burt Reynolds and a scruffy little dog? This man made the first sound film in the UK, was trained at arguably the greatest film studio ever built (UFA) and worked with an extraordinary array of writers, editors, painters, sculptors and actors. He collaborated with Salvador Dali in creating the dream sequence in "Spellbound". His friends and casual acquaintances included some of the best filmmakers in the world. He should have known better than to love two films of such low artistic standards. That's the trouble with favorites: sometimes we know, and can't help ourselves!


Best (Opinions defended by deep, self-conscious knowledge):"Vertigo" is the best film I have ever seen. I have written about it in classes and been given approval for my arguments. I could spend several hours walking you through every scene in the film, stating what standards of excellence this film has met better than any other I have ever seen. However, that is for another blog entry...actually, I may never write it, to protect those who have never seen this touchstone of 20th century art. I have walked a few of my friends through this masterpiece, and they found my arguments very compelling. However, we could not have a debate, because their expertise did not match my own. I have seen the complete film more than 30 times, read a dozen articles and books exploring it and have seen most of the major films according the distinction of being "the best". I have found most of them lacking. Only 2 other films challenge "Vertigo" in my mind and imagination. Neither have beaten it to the top spot. One day, I know I will enter a debate, in which someone will challenge my arguments with their own. It will be an interesting discussion.


Arguing the worth or quality of a work of art, a bridge, a suit, a three course dinner or a political decision requires knowledge. Otherwise, your position stems from feelings, which may fill you with conviction, but are easily swayed, and usually "jangle like wires in the wind". Thoughts from scholarly, historical sources are much more stable and do not sway as easily. This is not about who is best: it is about who has more to give to the understanding of a subject.


A Practical Demonstration:Almost from the moment we met, my wife and I disagreed about the merits of film director Ingmar Bergman. One day I realized what had caused our schism. She tried to watch the film "Persona" twice and had barely finished it. Each time resulted in her nearly running screaming from the room. "That isn't a film". "Don't ever show that to me again". "How can you like that"? She loves "Wild Strawberries", "The Seventh Seal" and "Smiles of a Summer Night"; all bona fide Bergman classics. Two other films brought out even more enthusiastic approval: "The Virgin Spring" and "Autumn Sonata". The second of these two films, in particular, brought her to tears and led to her declaring that "Autumn Sonata" was the best film she had ever seen. So how could someone who obviously loved the great Swede's films hate, what was for me, his greatest achievement? Expertise.


The first time I saw "Persona", it left me bewildered, but haunted. I did not return to it until the second semester of Film History; when my professor, Bruce Kawin, chose it as the single example of Bergman's oeuvre he would show. With everything I had learned thus far, I saw "Persona" in a new light. I watched it again at least a dozen times. I took classes with the great Marion Keane, the single most intelligent person I have ever met. We discussed the film and my understanding of it grew. I studied Bergman's films for an entire semester with another luminary in my education, Professor Saranjan Gangulay. By the end of the class, "Persona's" place in my esteem was firmly fixed.


"Persona" is an extremely challenging film. I have shown it to friends older than my wife, who also detested it; and one former colleague, nearly ten years younger than I was, who declared it the greatest film he had ever seen. My conviction about its merits required intensive study, thought and writing academic papers. The result: I can claim it is the best film Bergman ever made. Will that assertion ever change? I do not think so. However, I do not know everything about Bergman's films, despite my expertise. I must admit to the possibility, however unlikely.


When I presented all of the evidence for giving "Persona" its fair due, my wife was not interested. She did not like it. Then I realized: she did not have to. "Persona" is no danger of being ignored or forgotten. Enough people have loved it and studied it, to ensure it will remain in the vanguard of our understanding of Bergman's contribution to cinema. I breathed a sigh of relief. Her dislike of the film would not damage it, and maybe one day, she might want to watch it again, as her understanding of life and her relation to reality grows with age; key subjects in "Persona". Meanwhile, we could share our love of "Autumn Sonata". It is not Bergman's best, but the struggle between child and parent strikes a chord with both of us; and we might be more inclined to throw it into the DVD player than "Persona". "Persona" may be the best, but "Autumn Sonata" is our favorite.

To review:
Every person, all 100% of every person who has every lived, is alive now, and ever will live has a right to declare what are their "favorites". Those choices are sacrosanct, to be taken for what they are, without need for justification or expertise. Just because you "travel away from home", does not mean you do not look forward to going back. "Hey Bandit! Hey Bandit! Listen to 'dis! You hear that?! That's the ol' Evil Kinevil"! However, it is the experts who must justify their views. We live in a time when the line between "favor" and "expertise" has been blurred by overzealous individuals, who want fame and attention, without doing the hard work of becoming worthy of attention; just ask Bill O'Reilly and Glen Beck!


I find making the distinctions I have laid out extremely useful in my life and relationships. I offer them to you all and hope they will be useful.