[deltaonezero]

Maybe. The problem is the majority of the population has the exact same taste I'm talking about. Everyone loves summer blockbusters while Bladerunner is a niche.

So am I rationalizing something or am I trying to explain something to a stubborn elitist minority?

I think we're both intelligent enough to know that the later reason is the actual reality and that I'm not the one actually rationalizing things.

Top Gun just crossed a billion dollars, and while I haven't seen it, I'm sure the pacing is frenetic as fuck. Nobody needs to rationalize a billion dollars, but somebody definitely needs to justify a niche movie like blade runner.

cheers.

[Apocryphon]

Top Gun Maverick’s pacing, while nowhere as meandering as its ‘80s predecessor, was actually not frenetic until perhaps the terminal velocity climax. It’s a very character-based film, not only a special effects extravaganza. It harkens to a slightly older type of action flick.

[deltaonezero]

I'm just reusing the other guys' terminology. In general I'm just talking about the pacing of blockbusters, and the guy said I'm rationalizing really bad movies with "frenetic" pacing.

I think your definition of frenetic is different from his. When he's talking about frenetic, he's talking about the new Top Gun and MCU blockbusters and such and such. He thinks that level of momentum is bad and too way too quick, which is a deviant opinion from most of the general audience who loves these blockbusters.