Recently viewed movies.

I wanted to mention the source, but I couldn't remember it, and I couldn't find it on Google either. But it was someone very well-known. Even then, I thought it was an obvious falsehood. I was even indignant because my favorite author clearly isn't a children's writer. But at the same time, I thought there might be a grain of truth. Maybe even two. First: a broader (including age) target audience is greater than a narrower one. This doesn't always outweigh the other pros and cons of a work, and it rarely does, but it's worth keeping in mind. Second: an adult's opinion isn't necessarily more authoritative than a child's. That is, yes, you said that from your point of view, the film is below par, and even from the director's point of view, it might be below par. But why is the director's opinion or your opinion today more authoritative than your eight-year-old self's opinion? And even if it is more authoritative (I can agree with that, with reservations, meaning that a child's opinions are more easily changed by external factors and are less stable), then why shouldn't the latter's opinion be valid (I can't agree with that at all)? So, for me, this film with post-irony (if you're right about the director's intention) also contains post-post-irony – in the end, the film turned out to be, apparently, decent, partially refuting the post-ironic intention. Well, partially, of course, not completely.