Post by Vassaggo on Sept 7, 2018 9:28:19 GMT
There is no such thing as Truth in art. There is only what you believe. Trust me 2 years getting my Art Minor, I had to sit a critique 100's of paintings and sculptures. The first thing they teach you is just that no one's opinion matters other than your own or the person buying the art. Master Painters opinions, Art Critics, etc mean nothing. I've won a few Art Shows in High School and College. Me winning first place vs the 100's of other participants didn't make my drawings or paintings any better than theirs.
If you truly think so then it means education and the circle of life is worthless. thankfully they are not. there are steps we do to get better in life. mcu movies are still on the baby step , it is Disney afterall who admitted they make comic films for kids, xmen and dc are in the grown up steps.
when I was in school, I can compare two essays I wrote , one with a B or D grade and I can see why I got a D compared to the B. If you are telling me , you cant do the same and actually tell the difference, then I have nothing left to say to you. you mcu fans have become so delusional and erratic, you even ignore the fabric of how the real world works just to defend these Disney toy garbage movies. I feel sorry of u.
Are you telling me you don't know why magneto from first class is a better character than Killmonger? okay. Cheers
Grammar for one is a set of agreed upon rules. If you use "There" when you mean "Their" then you are wrong. Grammar is just part of the grading of an Essay. The other part is backing up your main idea with explanation. If your essay is supposed to explain how Medieval Weapons and Armor evolved and you don't back that up with information you will also get points knocked off.
When it comes to art their is no grammar. In photo realistic you don't want to see paint strokes although their are great photo realistic paintings you see brush strokes. In photo realistic it's supposed to be realistic, but that's not a hard rule. The painting could look nothing like the subject, but using the techniques of photo realistic and it still works. Even the idea behind the art in the artists mind could be for one thing and no one else agrees with his Idea. And guess what it still can be a good piece of art work.
Case in point I won an art show in college with a pen an ink of a Raccoon. It was the second time I used pen and ink and I fucked up every known technique you could use with the media. And it still won.
Same goes with Movies. There are Techniques film makers are supposed to use to set up the story, but if they don't use them they still can be good.
Clerks by Kevin Smith was shot mainly in a 2 shot with hardly no moving of the camera. It was shot in black and white because they were broke. It was a darling at the Festivals. He broke about every rule to making a good movie. Critics started to assume they used static shots and black and white so it looks like security footage for the Clerks. That Idea never came into his head while making the movie though.
In the end you are trying to come up with an objective metric to judge subjective matter. It can't be done. There is no way to come up with a check list on what is Good or Bad.
In my opinion I liked Ian McClellan's Magneto 100x better Fastbender's. I could explain my reasons why I feel this way, but my supporting information would just be opinion. The same way you supporting your opinion for the reason you like Fastbender's Magneto better than Killmonger. It doesn't matter.