Triticum Guzzler posted:

The essence of the criticism of the criticism that has been ongoing, at least on my part, is that it is bad. It is not good. It is really not very informative. It is not that it is bad to "care".

If you actually legitimately care about film, there is a good chance you do not post about it on this web site, because if you look at the movie forum (or the book forum, etc) you see that largely there's an incredible fixation on really childish products (and they are usually products rather than films) with a corresponding lack of taste. I'm sure it's an idea that's unfamiliar to you, as a grown man who wants to surgically replace his dick and balls with a coin operated motorised Donald Duck ride who is about 3 wispy chin hairs away from being a convicted rapist, but when criticism is coming from a really juvenile place about a less-juvenile subject it can seem very superficial and difficult to respect. Like when they allow kids to do news reports on the actual news.

This is one side of the coin here. Some of the reviewers present as, essentially, children of varying extreme largeness. But even if you read what they have to say about children's movies, it's still incredibly basic analysis of a film seen through a lens of a culture who are obsessed with identity politics in all things.

For example, if you read this week's review of The Boxtrolls, all you will learn is:

- The reviewer liked Coraline and Paranorman, but this film has a worse story
- There are trolls who wear boxes, also there are two characters who have names
- The film is nominally about the trolls who wear boxes, however it focuses on one of them who isn't REALLY a troll, but is actually a boy. This is a "big problem".
- The villain is avaristic and ugly. He pretends to be a woman, this is also a big problem, but we're not told why. Just that tumblr dislikes that and they're right to do so.
- The animation is good, kids will like it.

The only thing gleaned from this review that you won't get from the trailer is a number score and at some point a man wears a dress. It's an 800 word sideways glance at a movie and it really does not do a good job reviewing it outside of conveying the general sentiment that it's sort of not bad. I don't respect this, and I don't much care what this person has to say about other movies especially if they're more complicated than this movie for 6-year-olds.

On top of which the reviews are completely joyless, on a comedy web site. It's not just that it's really out of place, it's poorly executed in its own right. I'm not trying to illegally troll or insult them so please do not electronically beat me up, but I don't think they're cut out for this.

Thank you for reading this wearying post. As a reward, here is a picture of the cast of Duck Tales taking public transport so you can finally blast the biggest load of your life you mewling piece of poo poo idiot

Black Bones posted:

Then don't read them?

quote:

Instead just post a lot about how you really don't care

quote:

and maybe no one will notice that you have poor reading comprehension

quote:

and the front page writers will totally stop having opinions about art and politics that clearly offend you!

quote:

It's possible that could happen. Good luck!

corker2k posted:

I would like to stick up for Current Releases.

quote:

Some of the comparisons and criticisms in recent weeks have been a little tenuous,

quote:

but on the whole I like the style and tone of these pieces.

quote:

You may disagree,

quote:

but the "standard" reviews have made better reading than the "guest" or "In the style of" reviews,

quote:

and to call the writers "talentless hacks" is cruel and unfair.

quote:

Disagreeing with a review is fair; decreeing the whole section of the website is useless is not.

Black Bones posted:

Oh you have no idea, buddy. My many jowls quiver under my beard.

Black Bones posted:

To be clearer, Baloo's culture-gender mixing is good.

Black Bones posted:

Bagheera is a manic street preacher (a Black Panther!)

Black Bones posted:

Fair enough, I won't break up individual posts anymore, although I do worry about some of y'alls ability to figure out what I am responding to, since a common complaint seems to be that CR is allegedly unclear or duplicitous (while simultaneously being too dumb or basic, even to the point of being childlike).


Meh, it was a quick idea off the top of my head meant to serve as an example. It's certainly not a strong one.


The target audience is anyone who interested in what movies are coming out and what some goons thought about them. It is the same audience that reads other front page material, the same that reads the forums. You and me and any other terrible nerd.

I have not noticed a “marked” difference between CR and other features. The reviews are usually straight, with the occasional experiment (like the Gone Girl one) and some that outright mock the film without any attempt at review. But even the serious ones still fall within the general dorky point-of-view that is Something Awful. Sometimes they are good and I agree, other times they are good yet I disagree, and yes sometimes they are bad (like the Gone Girl one), but those aren't often enough to elicit much emotion from me. WTF D&D is pretty consistently creative and funny imo, but some of them are boring too. It happens.

Don't forget, if you don't like the CR review about it, there is usually a thread in CD where other people with widely different opinions and notions are talking about the movie.

If you don't like something, you should definitely criticize it, but try to criticize it well. A lot of the previous noise was not good criticism, because they were not attempting to explain what was wrong with the review of a given kid's movie, but just expressing endless incredulity over the fact that a kid's movie was reviewed at all.

And there are several main and sub forums on here for people to blow off steam with low effort insults, if that's all they want to do. This thread as near as I can tell is intended for constructive (or what passes for it) feedback. Now some of y'all are being coaxed into doing so, that's good!


This is what I mean about bad criticism – it appears like you didn't really read any review. The infamous Boxtrolls review (for example) discusses all of these things that I bolded. Feel free to check if you think I'm lying, which brings me to the paranoia:




Tatum Girlparts, you understood the Gone Girl thing correctly. So did I, and I haven't seen the film nor am I interested in doing so. It's one thing to fear being mislead by the reviewers, but don't you even trust yourself?

I don't really think CR is very “leftist”, the reviewers as a group seem to have both progressive and conservative opinions. And in spite of being a crazy gay retard, I'm not the one trying to ascribe weird motivations/inner thoughts to others. You could be right, but it's more likely that we can safely take them at their word. Criticizing anyone's politics is good, but ranting about vague left-wing bias, well, you should know how that comes across as.

How do we know the reviewers have a “perceived social obligation” and are “outraged”, that they decided a movie was “problematic” before they saw it? It's far more likely they enjoy watching and thinking about film, and call problems as they see them.


How do you determine this merit? I hope you don't use “pre-approved” opinions


There's that paranoia again. They are colluding with the “leftist” hivemind! I bet that gamer girl is involved somehow, perhaps she cuckolded the film industry as well!


Your first reading is actually pretty good. The second falls apart, but you did that on purpose.

“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” - Freud
“Yeah? And sometimes it's just a big brown dick in your mouth!” - Carlin

Actually, both the psychologist and comedian are wrong (or only half right). It's always both. And that's ok, seriously. Penises are good. Vaginas too for that matter. Fear them not, goons.


More paranoia. If someone is actually saying they are the end-all be-all of anything, that's life giving you a big hint: ignore this person. Your silly Speed analysis is great, and not dumb at all. Of course you are free to say that it is, as I am free to say that it isn't. No one is silenced, unless they silence themselves. Don't give in to weakness.

Masturbating is fun and healthy (don't overdo it though. I shouldn't have to say that, but y'know, nerds).

And I never said the Jungle book was about King Louie (this is what im talking about when I mock reading comprehension). It's about Mowgli becoming a man. Louie is definitely the most interesting villain, as opposed to the tiger and snake, but the story isn't about him. His quest for weapons of mass destruction is a subplot, at best. But it wasn't a strong reading, as I admitted, so whatever


DUDE! Someone should tell the mods/admins! WE CANT THEY'RE PART OF IT! What?! Alas, we did not heed the warning of Nolan's Batmen

Corridor posted:

wait is black bones 'jay dub' or whomever was behind the current releases? i've been thinking he was some unrelated nut who was super defensive about the front page for some reason.


when i read this, i legit thought this was a funny parody of a person outraged by the cartoon, and didn't understand how none of my friends could see that it was a parody

SpiderHyphenMan posted:

What the gently caress happened?

ArfJason posted:

Black Bones posted:

A wise philosopher once said, "Be careful what you wish for, because you just . . might . . get it."


Plane represents those who think CR is over-analyzing. Girl symbolizes those who think it's too basic. Unified in their impotence, they combine into Girl-Plane, and confront Reviewer-Buu! "You're not good, you're bad" they cry, hoping they will not be asked to explain.

"How so?" ponders Reviewer-Buu.

"No! Don't think about children's art, it has no merit!" Girl-Plane rumbles, burning with the flames of indignation. "You dumb gay baby!"

But Reviewer-Buu does not hear Girl-Plane, for he has been considering his pre-approved opinions. He smiles. Next stop, upvote city.

The screen wipes to black, sparing the viewer the sight of Reviewer-Buu drawing Girl-Plane into his all-encompassing review embrace, absorbing her into his gross bubblegum flesh.

Roll credits.

Tatum Girlparts posted:

The issue is when you take issue with a movie because 'this plane is too sexy, MISOGYNY!' there's no conversation to be had there, literally no one looks at a plane and goes 'yea, a sexy object, much like a woman'. You're just inventing people to be mad at.

ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:

Oh come on, nobody who actually finds that poo poo sexually arousing is worthy of being defined as a human being.

Black Bones posted:

Then why is the last frame before the credits his smile? That and the text imply that he is enjoying the confrontation. If you have a better reading, go ahead and make it. It's fun!

Crow_Rodeo posted:

Actually I would really like to write current releases just so I can write reviews that discuss shot composition, historical accuracy, character development, etc. Alas, I guess that's just not CR is about anymore. Honestly the last really good review was "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty"

Some Guy TT posted:

Oh my God you guys are still here. What have you been doing all week?


gently caress it, let's get meta. Evidently no one here understands the concept of tongue-in-cheek anyway...


You guys do appreciate that there's a spectrum between 100% serious SuperMechaGodzilla post and obvious joke you laugh at, right?

RonMexicosPitbull posted:

Its free (or drat close to it) labor.

Pirate Jet posted:

He actually really really was.

Judge Clayjar posted:

im sorry to have called u a retard but im eberts widow and wont take this slander.