By Susanne Miller

 I've had many conversations recently with friends, acquaintances, co-workers, and strangers – essentially anyone who’ll take the time to discuss the matter - about what constitutes a good film, and frankly, I think most people have the wrong attitude. Invariably when the discussion turns to some cheesy 80s classic teen melodrama their eyes glaze over and they give me that, “I’m so above that sort of thing” look, while still trying to maintain a polite and non-judgmental demeanor.

But I have to ask – what’s the ultimate point of watching a movie? Is it escapism, entertainment, edification of one sort or another, or some combination there of? Does a movie have to be considered ‘high art’ to qualify as good, or can it also be fun, a diversion?

All good questions, I’m pretty sure you’ll agree, but few of us will come up with the same perspective. Let’s take the new film Snakes on a Plane; when I heard the title of this film, before I knew anything else about it, I knew exactly what it would be, that I would watch it (if likely when it’s out on DVD), and I would have a raucous good time doing so. As Bhavesh Malani recently posted in his blog:

As a general rule, the title of a film should tell us a little something about its content. Snakes on a Plane succeeds where Freddy Got Fingered failed - going into the film, you know exactly what you're getting yourself into. That's honest marketing. Add to that the sight of Samuel L. Jackson doing his wide-eyed, loud-mouthed shtick like only he can, and you're in for a classic film in its genre. Not since Killer Klowns From Outer Space has there been a film as ambitious as this, combining the twin terrors of venomous ophidians and air travel with panache. Without having seen the film - it releases in New Zealand today - I can tell you it beats Citizen Kane hands-down. That's the power of a good title.