Re: Seriously... What's wrong with film critics?!
Umm, yes it does. In an aggregation system that's binary, you are going to get extreme variance like this. So yes, good job highlighting the binary nature of Rotten Tomatoes, but I don't know how you reached the conclusion that you did. Its binary nature is what makes such wild discrepancies possible.Originally Posted by Cookiegod
Actually I just misquoted and mistakenly wrote New Yorker instead of New York Times. Yet my posts easily illustrate that the movie's rating wasn't sabotaged by "film critics" who "who simply cannot stand to have those childish premonitions of good and evil ripped apart in a congruent way." Or are three reviews not enough for you? Shall I find more where critics found issues with its plot structure? With the acting? With the, supposedly, lack of originality? Or literally any point that isn't "muh incels"?Since people here have quoted the New Yorker either without reading it fully or omitting the less pleasant part on purpose, which directly contradicts their claim, here:
Lol it doesn't matter what political affiliation you have. It doesn't take a lot of intelligence or research to see your statements on film critics for what they are. Shallow, vapid, and motivated by a political agenda against a perceived intolerant left.In other words: He heartedly admits he's been triggered. He just thinks it's best to play it cool.
It's also beautiful to see statements like these:
Yeah sure buddy. If people don't agree with you, they surely must be right-wing. Let's just pretend you're not the avowed antidemocrat and anarchocapitalist you frequently present yourself as.
While undoubtedly an interesting topic for a research paper, as a general sentiment or a powerful one-liner, your statement is simply not true. The "right" is just as guilty of censorship and intolerance to art as the "left". "Family values" complain just as much about violence as social justice warriors. For every feminist complaint, you'll find veterans or some other demographic whining about how "patriotic" or "un=American" a movie is. Then there's the churches, who can include both angles along with whining about how anti-Christian a movie is.What is also interesting, is that the conservatives historically have been much more tolerant to art than the left, and less inclined to use it politically. Richard Wagner was in the context of his time a leftie. His operas called for revolution and "free love". Yet he received a lot of praise from the bourgeois.
So no, I don't, in any way, think that conservatives are more tolerant to art. Especially since some of the strongest opinions on film, come from the right on this very site. As evidenced by a near universal revulsion for The Force Awakens. Of course according to Cookiegod that's just a bad movie. Because you know, his opinion is "apolitical".
I think its hilarious that you're accusing me of being politically motivated. How about you read your opening post? For somebody who wants to claim that they judge a movie based on its merits, and not its political message, you sure seem fixated on political correctness. As are a few posters in this thread.Do I think a piece of art can be highly political and still brilliant? Absolutely. Do I have to agree with anything in the political message for me for me to acknowledge that it's good? Absolutely not.
And that's where one of the key differences between Sukiyama on one side and me on the other is. I can and do judge the work on its own merits. He on the other hand needs to assert on a regular basis that people disagreeing with him on movies must be "right wing". Be that as it may I really miss the times when the left cheered art such as that of Bertold Brecht and Heinrich & Thomas Mann, rather than whatever lackluster, heartless product a certain billion dollar corporate conglomerate focused on children throws at them.
Reply With Quote
