As far as I understand quality is very subjective. And we can also say that quality is a many sided phenomenon. And here we can say that quality depends on the observer. If it is the man in the street I doubt that he can examine the work of art professionally. At the same time his estimation is based on the work of art itself with its message and emotions. I mean that the man in the street examines the work of art from the point of view of its content, but only then the form.

If we speak about some critic who also examines the work of art, his estimation will be aimed at searching for disadvantages and defects. Well, as it is said quality has different perspectives. And each perspective depends on the observer himself and on the aim of his examination of any particular work of art. And the appreciation of art is one’s personal attitude to this or that work of art influenced by its form, message and emotions contained in this very work of art and maybe some additional knowledge about the artist himself or a period of history when the work of art was created.

For example, there is a film "What dreams may come”. Watching it I don’t pay attention to its quality, to the methods of emotions and thoughts supply. I just see the message itself and the emotions. I feel what the main characters feel. I like the form of presenting the narration. The images created by the stage director make me amazed, help me have emotions and feelings the characters have, and also make me understand the thoughts inserted in the film more clearly.