I like bad movies.  I think the reason for this is because most of the time, bad movies are a hell of a lot more fun than good movies.  For example, I rather enjoyed the movie 2012.  It was a cool idea, I love John Cusack, and I just really enjoyed it.  The Artist, on the other hand, can go die in a fire.

Perhaps the problem is that my definition of a bad movie is incorrect.  I suppose it's logical to conclude that just because critics don't like a movie, well, that doesn't necessarily make it bad.  I'll use the movie 2012 as an example.  The critics didn't particularly like that movie.  Does that make it bad?  Perhaps not.  Popular opinion on the movie is also negative.  I hate using Metacritic -- I honestly wish the website would die in a fire, too -- but the movie is old enough now that the user reviews should be a rather accurate representation of what the average person thinks of it.  So that's two strikes against the film, I suppose.  On the other hand, the movie made almost $800 million.  Does the box office draw of a movie hold any weight when it comes to judging the "goodness" of a movie?

Or should I just say "I'll like a movie if I fucking want to, and no one else is going to tell me otherwise!"?

I kind of like that.

All that being said, I've been working with movies a lot over the past week, and it got me thinking because all the movies that I'm in the mood to watch at the moment aren't particularly award-winning films.  As odd as it may be coming from me, I seem to really enjoy dumb action films.  It seems odd, because it's nearly the opposite mentality I have to the kinds of video games that I enjoy playing.  If you took the kinds of movies that I like to watch, and applied it to video games, you would probably assume that my favorite games would be Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty.  And you would be so far off from the truth that the universe would die a heat death before you got back.  I find that amusing.  (Not the heat death thing.  The video game assumption thing.)