Is being entertained always considered a negative thing?

I was surprised by the answers to the question https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/10247/5522 Specifically, [@BuddHo's answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/10250/5522) which takes on the question >Why must entertainment be eschewed? I thought it was a great answer that clearly explained how being entertained *could be* a means of escape - to get away from being bored and relying on outside influences to create happiness. However, I had some questions I had left in the comments, but thought I should perhaps expand them into a new question here. > I am still struggling with your explanation for "Why must entertainment be eschewed?" Is not any action we take, even mentally, technically a source of entertainment - even practicing mindfulness? > >I think its the definition that causes me to struggle. "*Entertainment is the distractive cure for fear masked as boredom*" - I consider boredom and entertainment to be opposites, but that definition suggests otherwise. If one was doing nothing, yet was fine (not bored) - I would consider that as being entertained. If it is not one or the other, what is it when one is not bored, and not being entertained? Is being entertained always considered a negative thing?