For many years I have been thoroughly unable to enjoy either TV or movies. As a child I watched both, but those were far from my favorite activities, and when I became a teenager I stopped watching them altogether. Realizing now that appreciating those things would probably be a considerable boon to my social life, I want to learn to enjoy them. Because, while I tend to view them with some contempt and disdain, I must confess that I just do not understand why people enjoy them at all. And I think perhaps it is something I can learn. So, Dopers, what do you think? Is there any way to acquire a taste for TV or for movies?
Well, knowing what kind of entertainment you think you would enjoy first would help. There’s a lot of different stuff out there, and you’d have to sit through a lot of crap to find out what your personal tastes are. But why should you do that? So tell us, what kind of things do you like? What kind of comedy do you enjoy? List some favorite authors and musicians, as well as hobbies and types of stories…maybe we can draw some conclusions from those and make some reccomendations
Well, that’s part of the problem, I guess. Nothing I enjoy has much of a connection to popular culture. I’m a computer geek and an amateur pianist. I read philosophy and listen primarily to Bach and Beethoven, plus my own improvisations. I’m a creative person, and I only tend to observe others’ creations if they those creations can impress or astound me. In general, I suppose, I don’t have a very strong notion of “entertainment.” Perhaps I need to learn to be entertained.
If it is simply a matter of personal taste in entertainment, it might not be your thing. Learning a bit about the craft of film entertainment may spark some interest. I read Louis Giannetti’s Understanding Movies as a teenager, I thought it was a very good introduction to the subject. The book is used as a standard text in film classes, you could probably find a used copy or a library issue easily.
To me, hearing that someone doesn’t like movies is a bit like someone saying that they don’t like literature. You suppose that it’s possible, but more likely the person in question just hasn’t had enough exposure to literature. Because while people may not like certain genres of literature, virtually everyone has some types of novels they enjoy.
Granted, literature has a couple thousand years head-start on the movies, which, compared to other media, is still in its infancy. So, for a very choosy person, there are fewer great movies to choose from than great books. Still, for such a young medium, there’s a lot of great stuff to chose from.
The vast majority of movies are in a narrative form; maybe that kind of thing isn’t as appealing to you as more abstract things like music and philosophy? If that’s the case, try to seek out some experimental, non-narrative movies. One classic of the genre is Dziga Vertov’s The Man With the Movie Camera, which (as I recall – it’s been a long time since I saw it) totally rejects the narrative format, and instead tried to create a unique cinematic language through the use of cuts and other editing takes. Or Berlin: Symphonie of a Great City, which literally tried to create a cinematic “symphony.” I don’t know much about the genre except for those two (the two most famous examples, AFAIK), but there’s probably other examples.
If you do, in fact, like narrative stuff, then you’re swimming in choices! There are tons of great, intelligent movies out there. You mentioned you liked philosophy – maybe you’d like some Ingmar Bergman films. Or watch Eisenstein to see some brilliant editing techniques. Or Orson Welles – get hold of a DVD copy of “Citizen Kane” and watch it with the commentary tracks for a good introduction to what helps to make a movie great. As with any artistic genre, the more you know about something, the more you’re going to appreciate it. Most people when listening to a Bach fugue the first time aren’t too impressed, because the amazing structural, contrapuntal techniques Bach uses aren’t obvious to them. Only once you start studying fugues and finding out how amazing all the interweaving voices are do you properly appreciate how brilliant they are. The same thing goes with movies.
Now, if you want me to explain why most people are happy to spend Saturday night sitting on the couch with a bowl of popcorn and a DVD of “Hitch” in the player, I can’t help you. I can’t explain that any more than why most people prefer Britney Spears to J.S. Bach, except to say that some of Britney’s tunes are catchy, and Will Smith can be pretty funny – and for a lot of people that’s enough. Watching Eisenstein or Bergman or Welles or Vertov won’t improve your social life, but if you do just want to develop an appreciation of movies, they might be a good starting point for you.
I take the opposite stance. You’re an adult, you’ve had wide exposure to TV and movies, you don’t like them that much, no big whoop.
I’ve tried to develop an interest in team sports (football, baseball, hockey) and punk rock and rap to broaden horizons. Sometimes I’ll come across the last 5 minutes of a really close game and can halfway get into it or will hear a rap song I happen to like (Gangsta’s Paradise or whatever) but mostly the only competetive sport I really like is Jeopardy! and I’ll take showtunes, folksongs, easy listening and Beatles to 99.99999999% of punk and rap anyday.
If you don’t particularly care for TV and movies, ain’t nuttin’ wrong with that. I’m sure given time you could develop a taste for rotten plum smoothies but if you gag the first few times, why bother? You’re who you are.
I don’t think the punk rock and rap analogy is very relevant; the guy isn’t saying he dislikes kung fu movies, he’s saying he doesn’t like movies as a whole. The only real comparison is to someone who doesn’t like music, period. And be honest: if you met someone who said they didn’t like music, you’d probably think they really just hadn’t much exposure to different types of music. Because the vast majority of people have some kinds of music they like, be it opera, folk, rap, or anything in between. I think that’s the case with this guy – the fact that he says that nothing he enjoys “has much of a connection to popular culture” makes me think that he thinks that movies start and end with what’s playing at the local multi-plex.
Granted, he’s probably never going to get as excited by movies as he is by music or philosophy, or he’d know that by know. But if he does want to gain an appreciation of movies, I’m still betting that there are whole avenues of film that he hasn’t explored yet.
There are some movies I like, and some of them are considered “bad” or even “awful” by others. I don’t enjoy the atmosphere of a movie theater, so I generally wait until they are released on DVD to rent/buy them. I have never learned to enjoy TV very much, and don’t feel as if I’m missing much. Commercials irritate me most of the time. I’ll watch CSI if I’m at a friends house and they are watching it, but in general I’d rather pick up a book.
You’re on the right track, OP. Visual entertainment is a cheap but addictive drug.
TV and movies aren’t parallel entities, however. “Movies” are one type of entertainment that can appear on TV (or the big screen). So TV is a larger set.
If you mean half- or one-hour TV programs, however, yeah–they tend to be shit. Not because they appear on the TV hardware, but because there is not a committment to excellence in their creation (they need only be “good” enough to hold a small portion of a very large macro audience).
Movies? They are basically 1.5-hour to 3.0-hour stories told in a visual way. At their best, they are art, but I don’t usually like movies that try to be art. I tend to like comedies; I enjoy entertainment for entertainment’s sake.
And that’s the thing. You are missing out on very little great art, and if it doesn’t entertain you, then fuck it. You don’t need to change.
How do you feel about live theatre and/or concerts?
I watch plenty of TV and movies, and my social life is crap.
In college I had no TV and went to maybe 10 movies the whole time, and my social life was great.
Keep doing what you’re doing. Particularly with respect to the boob tube, it’s like forcing yourself to take heroin until you’re addicted.
There is art in movies (though not so much this year, or last), but if it’s not your cup of tea, screw it.
Reading that you have contempt for TV and movies and that you’re creative but you don’t seem to value other people’s creativity makes me think this isn’t really a TV or movie thing.
Are you a perfectionist?
Perhaps it’s simply mainstream television and films that don’t appeal to you. I really enjoy film and television, but this year really isn’t a great year for either. I really can’t suggest to anyone that they watch more sitcoms or reality shows, but there is good stuff out there.
I’m in the middle of the Vancouver International Film Festival: Hundreds of films from around the world screened over two and a half weeks. I’m in movie heaven, and none of the films I’ve seen are the mainstream Hollywood type. If and when there’s a film festival coming to your city, I suggest you get ahold of a program guide; you’re bound to find a few films in it that look like they might interest you.
Barring that, try watching a few documentaries on subjects that interest you, or film adaptations of plays (plays tend to be much better written than movies).
I can’t necessarily tell you why you should enjoy them, but I can suggest some things that some people get out of them. As others have pointed out, you might be just as well off avoiding TV and movies.
(1) The vast majority of popular movies, and much of what’s on TV, is fiction: stories. Most human beings like stories. Why this is could take a whole thread by itself, but among the reasons are
[list=a]
[li]The interest or excitement of seeing what will happen next[/li][li]Having characters to identify with and care about, to like or hate[/li][li]Escapism: getting out of ones own life situation and vicariously spending some time somewhere completely different[/li][li](perhaps conversely) for the light the story might shed on issues in ones own life[/li][li](Since you mention being interested in philosophy) A story can make abstract philosophical ideas concrete by showing examples of how they might play out in reality[/li][/list]
TV and movies are among (among, I said) the best storytelling media available.
(2) TV, especially news programs and documentary programs, is one source of information. Different people learn best in different ways. Depending on ones learning style and reading ability, one may get more from watching TV than from reading books and newspapers.
(3) People who like sports watch sports broadcasts and shows discussing sports. People who like music watch televised music performances, videos, and shows about music. People with other interests can, if they’re fortunate, find shows about those interests.
(4) Like to laugh? If you have any sense of humor at all, there’s probably something on TV somewhere that you’d consider funny.
(5) A case could be made that cinema is the world’s greatest, most complex art form, as it brings together so many other arts: music, visuals, writing, acting, etc. Consider Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy. When you consider all that went into its making, and all the people who contributed in so many different ways (not least J. R. R. Tolkien), it’s one of the greatest works of art that humankind has yet produced, measured by the amount of effort, talent, and artistry that went into it.
A similar point could made about TV programs. Production values are, on the average, lower, but TV has the advantage of being able to tell a long story, or series of stories, over the course of many episodes, letting you really get to know the characters and the world they live in.
Keep in mind that “90% of everything is crud” (Sturgeon’s Law). If you really want to get over your contempt and disdain, make sure you’re looking at the 10% that isn’t crud. (But also keep in mind that sometimes people just want to veg out and aren’t in the mood for anything more challenging than crud.)
Also, adding to Thudlow Boink’s comment, if you can afford to spring for cable os a dish, the pool from which to pick becomes greater (and crappier, but, hey)
Cable/Dish offers specialty channels, at least one of which may be devoted to your favorite subject
I think the OP should check out anything written by Joss Whedon. 
Thanks for all the opinions. I like the suggestion of reading a book on the subject, but Understanding Movies, which was recommended above, seems a bit too substantial for me. Is there anything simpler that could serve the same purpose?
To answer the questions that have been asked . . .
Yes I am, and I am startled that you could deduce such a thing from my statement. Could you elaborate?
Generally negative, although I can enjoy a great concert from time to time. I recently enjoyed a performance of the Eroica that I thought was transcendental.
Uh, heh, I guessed it myself and didn’t say anything. What led me to think so? Not really sure, except I have met other perfectionists and they had the same mindset.
I am with the people who say you shouldn’t watch TV. I don’t watch TV myself. True, there are some great shows but it is a drain on your mind.
Movies, on the other hand…someone up above made a great point when they compared it to literature. I think if you don’t read you just haven’t found a book you like yet, same with movies.
There are so many movies, from hi-brow art films to flashy action films, that it’s hard to turn them off entirely. I suggest looking for movies a bit out of the ordinary…perhaps some foreign-language films, some art films, films of culture, etc.
And if you don’t get into them, so what? If you enjoy your life, what else matters?
I guess I can relate, in some ways, so I projected.
I can be a perfectionist about some very specific things, and I sound like you sounded when I talk about them. I get impatient with anything that isn’t breathtaking. I’d rather just do it myself.
But I’m not a perfectionist most of the time, I think because I’m too lazy. 
There are so few perfect things in the world, and I can’t think of any piece of art, in any medium, that qualifies. For me, art is the exploration of imperfection, the dissonance that creates tension and, possibly, release.
Some artforms are more imperfect than others, because some exploit our flaws and misconceptions better than others. The more static the art, the more perfection is achievable. The more independent the artist, the more perfect the art.
Movies are messy and silly and dwell in the chaos of physical space. There are too many cooks, too many bodies, too many glitches, too many compromises.
But you have a desire, however small, to appreciate them more. So, what’s the epitome of the artform? Where is the exploration of dissonance greatest, the tension of imperfection at its peak?
Animation.
It’s a wholly created world, only as true as the artist chooses, and always walking a tightrope between realism and fantasy. If a dog doesn’t look like a dog, it’s because it isn’t supposed to look like a dog, just enough like a dog that you think “dog” and not “pony” or “asparagus.”
And the exemplar?
Wallace and Gromit’s “The Wrong Trousers.”
Let the booing and catcalls commence.
Seriously, though, I find the way around my own tendencies toward perfectionism, which can be a pain when it comes to entertainment, is to head toward things that are obviously not trying to be perfect representations of the world as it is but are exploring the world as it could be. That pushes me toward the fantastic rather than the precise.
And to echo what most people have said: If you can’t find something you like, don’t sweat it. You only live once, and there’s far too much stuff out there to force yourself to do things for “fun” that you dislike.
Can I suggest you watch the film Amadeus? It’s about - or rather, a partially fictional treatment of - Mozart, and the jealously of Salieri when Mozart bursts onto the scene. There is a lot about improvisation on there, the nature of genius, and is certainly an astounding example of filmic art.