>>I think for great directors who have done great films, you
>>don't really rationalize a bad film and think it's great
>just
>>because of the director.. On the contrary, your expectations
>>are higher than a normal director's work and also you have
>>something to compare it to.. The director has already set a
>>bar for himself so others may be more critical of every
>>release..
>
>Yes, one expects more from a Scorsese than from a Brett
>Ratner. So when you see a Scorsese picture that's not on pace
>with Raging Bull, you can be disappointed. But my idea is
>that people will manipulate their disappointment into
>satisifaction, because they don't want to feel let down. So
>because it is a great director, whereas you would say we
>expect more, I agree, but maintain that the higher
>expectations only make some justify to a greater degree.
>
>Sure, there are always exceptions, and some movies are beyond
>irrational rationalizing.
>
>
>(I apologize if that was more confusing)

No apology needed, I probably just misinterpreted what you were saying.. yea, I agree to an extent.. but I think it varies a lot at the same time.. I'd say more people give the benefit of the doubt.. but personally, I view each movie as a separate entity in and of itself.
>>Like Bringing out the dead by Scorsese.. I'm a huge fan of
>his
>>catalogue, but I still rate this as one of the worst movies
>>i've seen..
>>
>>(John Leguizamo in Dreads wasn't a good sign)
>
>a. Maybe I'm fooling myself too, but I actually like Bringing
>out the Dead. However, when I rented it the first time, the
>lady at Hollywood Video asked me if I wanted to rethink the
>rental.
>
>b. That's Marc Anthony not John Leguizamo.

oh snap you're right.. been a while since i've seen it.. while we're on the subject, what did you like about it? It seemed so over the top.