|
|
Post by Skaathar on Mar 19, 2017 19:33:10 GMT
I have a simple rule with critics. I find their ratings usually accurate until they start including SJW or PC issues into their criticisms. If they criticize a film for being racist or sexist, or if they praise it for being diverse or for empowering minorities, then I know they're not being objective with the show at all. The moment you start judging a movie for anything other than its quality as a movie that's an automatic disqualification in my books.
And that's why I'll pay attention to critic scores for movies like BvS, Batman Begins, Logan and Avengers but will automatically disregard critic reviews for shows like Ironfist, Ghostbusters (2016), Beauty and the Beast and even Luke Cage.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Mar 19, 2017 19:52:29 GMT
While I haven't seen Iron Fist yet, most of the critics complaining about it seem top be doing so because they consider it to be uneventful with bad fight scenes, and an unlikable lead. Or at least that's what they thought of the first 6 episodes of the season. Besides, Doctor Strange received plenty of early controversy for whitewashing the Ancient One, but the film still ended up being well received.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Mar 19, 2017 20:03:44 GMT
While I haven't seen Iron Fist yet, most of the critics complaining about it seem top be doing so because they consider it to be uneventful with bad fight scenes, and an unlikable lead. Or at least that's what they thought of the first 6 episodes of the season. Besides, Doctor Strange received plenty of early controversy for whitewashing the Ancient One, but the film still ended up being well received. It's not really whether you give the movie a good or bad rating. But if you start including any criticism about racial or gender related issues, I just can't take the rest of your review seriously. As for Ironfist, though a lot of the reviews did mention the glacial pace and bad choreography, majority if them also hated on it for racial reasons. And when your judgement is already clouded by an issue like that, it is much more easy to be unforgiving of any other faults the movie has. The inverse is true as well. If you praise a movie for racial or gender/sex related reasons then you are also more likely to give its mistakes a pass. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Mar 19, 2017 20:11:17 GMT
Unless critics count race, gender, or anything like that as a major part of what's wrongs with the show, bringing it up doesn't really discredit the rest of their criticisms. Besides, there were a couple of reviews for BvS and SS that accused the films of being misogynistic, and or racist, so does that mean that those reviews shouldn't count either?
There will always be critics bringing up political aspects to something. This is true for all shows and movies. As long as the rest of the show or movie is considered good by the critics, most of them will be willing to give whatever race or gender related problems they have a pass.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 19, 2017 21:36:44 GMT
Unless critics count race, gender, or anything like that as a major part of what's wrongs with the show, bringing it up doesn't really discredit the rest of their criticisms. Besides, there were a couple of reviews for BvS and SS that accused the films of being misogynistic, and or racist, so does that mean that those reviews shouldn't count either? There will always be critics bringing up political aspects to something. This is true for all shows and movies. As long as the rest of the show or movie is considered good by the critics, most of them will be willing to give whatever race or gender related problems they have a pass. I feel that if a movie raises questions like those, it's not the critics' fault for bringing it up. Now in reference to the OP, if it's something like in the case of Ghostbusters and they go "oh it's got girls in it so it's good", no that's not good criticism at all. I get complaints about that. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 19, 2017 23:01:53 GMT
I agree,
Anybody saying Iron Fist is whitewashed, is an IDIOT!. It's not white washed, and it's not even close. |
|
|
|
Post by Jerk on Mar 19, 2017 23:29:45 GMT
I have a rule too. Don't read reviews until after seeing the movie/tv show.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 5:37:52 GMT
I read the reviews and take them seriously. But always after I have seen it for myself and have made up my own mind.
Im now 7 episodes in to Iron Fist and I absolutely love it. For me its right up there with Daredevil season 1. Its better than Jessica Jones and Luke Cage. At least to me.
I did I say I dont care about race or gender or what so ever. Just judge a movie or series at his own merrit. And I also dont care about the comics. Its just source material for writers and directors to base their own views on. If they would have made Iron Fist a three legged gay purple alien with mommy issues and it would have worked in the series I would have been fine with that.
Why are people always so sensitive about this stuff?
|
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Mar 20, 2017 14:53:17 GMT
I have a simple rule with critics. I find their ratings usually accurate until they start including SJW or PC issues into their criticisms. If they criticize a film for being racist or sexist, or if they praise it for being diverse or for empowering minorities, then I know they're not being objective with the show at all. The moment you start judging a movie for anything other than its quality as a movie that's an automatic disqualification in my books. And that's why I'll pay attention to critic scores for movies like BvS, Batman Begins, Logan and Avengers but will automatically disregard critic reviews for shows like Ironfist, Ghostbusters (2016), Beauty and the Beast and even Luke Cage. That's like saying, judge Birth of a Nation by its merits as pioneering in filmmaking and just ignore all the black face and racist stereotypes. There's plenty of room for discussing race and gender in films. Particularly, if they're jarring and prominent. Plus, reviews aren't objective at all. They're all subjective. What one critic thinks is good, another won't. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Mar 20, 2017 17:54:55 GMT
I have a simple rule with critics. I find their ratings usually accurate until they start including SJW or PC issues into their criticisms. If they criticize a film for being racist or sexist, or if they praise it for being diverse or for empowering minorities, then I know they're not being objective with the show at all. The moment you start judging a movie for anything other than its quality as a movie that's an automatic disqualification in my books. And that's why I'll pay attention to critic scores for movies like BvS, Batman Begins, Logan and Avengers but will automatically disregard critic reviews for shows like Ironfist, Ghostbusters (2016), Beauty and the Beast and even Luke Cage. That's like saying, judge Birth of a Nation by its merits as pioneering in filmmaking and just ignore all the black face and racist stereotypes. There's plenty of room for discussing race and gender in films. Particularly, if they're jarring and prominent. Plus, reviews aren't objective at all. They're all subjective. What one critic thinks is good, another won't. Haven't watched Birth of a Nation so can't comment on that. But if a movie's purpose is to call attention to race and gender, then it becomes a point of discussion. But if you start including talks about race and gender in a movie that doesn't call it to question, then you're simply detracting from judging the movie on what it should be judged on. |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Mar 20, 2017 19:48:26 GMT
A movie should be judged on everything that went into the making of it: that includes the cast and their race.
There's nothing wrong with discussing race. Like I said, if it's distracting or prominent, then it's up for judging. Like The Conqueror. John Wayne in yellow face playing Ghengis Khan is most certainly up for discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Mar 20, 2017 21:45:03 GMT
I have a simple rule with critics. I find their ratings usually accurate until they start including SJW or PC issues into their criticisms. If they criticize a film for being racist or sexist, or if they praise it for being diverse or for empowering minorities, then I know they're not being objective with the show at all. The moment you start judging a movie for anything other than its quality as a movie that's an automatic disqualification in my books. And that's why I'll pay attention to critic scores for movies like BvS, Batman Begins, Logan and Avengers but will automatically disregard critic reviews for shows like Ironfist, Ghostbusters (2016), Beauty and the Beast and even Luke Cage. What if the movie or show is about SJW/PC issues. Movies like Ghostbusters (2016) had an agenda. Paul Feig's whole thing was about girl power and bashing men. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Mar 20, 2017 21:45:34 GMT
I have a rule too. Don't read reviews until after seeing the movie/tv show. Hey, me too! I usually disagree about 30-50% of the time with the Critical Consensus; it happens enough that I often don't even know what the critical consensus is anymore, since I've long stopped going to sites like RottenTomatoes after their clear and obvious "capture" after the release of The Force Awakens, the worst movie ever. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Mar 20, 2017 21:47:23 GMT
I have a simple rule with critics. I find their ratings usually accurate until they start including SJW or PC issues into their criticisms. If they criticize a film for being racist or sexist, or if they praise it for being diverse or for empowering minorities, then I know they're not being objective with the show at all. The moment you start judging a movie for anything other than its quality as a movie that's an automatic disqualification in my books. And that's why I'll pay attention to critic scores for movies like BvS, Batman Begins, Logan and Avengers but will automatically disregard critic reviews for shows like Ironfist, Ghostbusters (2016), Beauty and the Beast and even Luke Cage. What if the movie or show is about SJW/PC issues. Movies like Ghostbusters (2016) had an agenda. Paul Feig's whole thing was about girl power and bashing men. If the movie itself is about addressing SJW/PC issues, then it's perfectly fine. That's what the movie is about anyway right? But if the movie tries to hide an agenda underneath a movie that has nothing to do with it, then I think that's just crass. I.E. Ghostbusters. |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Mar 20, 2017 21:50:50 GMT
Not at all. Just look at the X-Men which for decades have been able to weave messages about civil rights and recently gay rights (with X-Men 2's "Have you tried not being a mutant?"). Movies, like any form of story telling, can do anything with their messages. Overt or underneath. Both are acceptable. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Mar 20, 2017 21:52:24 GMT
What if the movie or show is about SJW/PC issues. Movies like Ghostbusters (2016) had an agenda. Paul Feig's whole thing was about girl power and bashing men. If the movie itself is about addressing SJW/PC issues, then it's perfectly fine. That's what the movie is about anyway right? But if the movie tries to hide an agenda underneath a movie that has nothing to do with it, then I think that's just crass. I.E. Ghostbusters. Yep. Likewise for The Force Awakens. I credit Donald Trump's victory at the polls in no small part to the release of these and similar films leading up to the election; it was backlash against a perceived onslaught of propaganda by, among other places, Hollywood. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Mar 20, 2017 21:59:35 GMT
Not at all. Just look at the X-Men which for decades have been able to weave messages about civil rights and recently gay rights (with X-Men 2's "Have you tried not being a mutant?"). Movies, like any form of story telling, can do anything with their messages. Overt or underneath. Both are acceptable. To be clear here, I'm not saying that it's wrong for the movies themselves to put the messages in there. I'm talking about critics focusing on these perceived issues that ruins their objectivity for me. |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Mar 20, 2017 22:04:07 GMT
"Perceived" is a good choice of words. Delusional would be better.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Mar 20, 2017 22:15:58 GMT
"Perceived" is a good choice of words. Delusional would be better. Nah, I'll stick with "perceived" since it places no value judgment whatsoever on the opinion and merely acts as a descriptor.  |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Mar 20, 2017 22:34:01 GMT
No, delusional is apt. The judgement is wholly intended.
|
|
