| So with a lot emergence of anime pseudo-intellectual critics I've seen so many of them that only watch anime that people, whether it be other pseudo-intellectuals or just casual anime watcher say it was "great" or "masterpiece'. Do they deserve to be called a critic? Because in my opinion, critics shouldn't do that but also watch those anime that most people say it's quite good, mediocre, quite bad, and abysmal or else, they don't entitled to be called a critic. What's your opinion? |
 |
| A critic is simply a guy who consumes a thing and then officially releases some kind of statement on his perceived quality of the thing and his reasoning behind the assessment. What is being consumed is irrelevant as a criterion for the position. |
 This glorious signature image was created by @Mayumi! I am the Arbiter of Absolute Truth, and here is my wisdom: "Anime was always influenced by the West. This is not news. Shoujo is the superior genre primarily aimed at young people. Harem/isekai are lazy genres that refuse any meaningful innovation. There is no 'Golden Age.' There will always be top-shelf anime. You should be watching Carole & Tuesday." |
| I don't care if they believe that supremacy exist within anime communtity in general, I just think of it as a form of entertainment like any other stuff... If they want to dig too deep about it, then be my guess... |
| There are three rules for critics: 1. They must consume a fairly large number of titles from a medium (this amount varies depending on the medium) 2. They must publish their honest opinions on titles that they believe other people do or should care about the most 3. They must make money doing this As you can see there isn't any rule contained in these that a critic must consume a wide variety of quality from their medium of choice, in fact rule number 2 states that even if they do consume a variety they might only publish reviews for the ones that the most people consider to be masterpieces. |
  |
| Anyone can be a critic. It's not that hard. What he choose to watch is not important. |
But it's important to remember that a movie review is subjective;it only gives you one person's opinion. http://www.classzone.com/books/lnetwork_gr08/page_build.cfm?content=analyz_media&ch=30 It doesn't matter if you like LoGH,Monster etc.If you are a jobless or college/school dropout living in your mom basement, you are still an unintelligent loser. Taste in anime does not make you a better person.If elitist don't exist, casual pleb and shit taste also don't exist. |
| My opinion is that you seem a quite butthurt because of some review. Are they self-calling themselves critics or it's you calling them like that just because of a critical review? |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| Critics can do anything they want. I just ignore most of them anyway. |
 |
zombie_pegasus said: There are three rules for critics: 1. They must consume a fairly large number of titles from a medium (this amount varies depending on the medium) 2. They must publish their honest opinions on titles that they believe other people do or should care about the most 3. They must make money doing this As you can see there isn't any rule contained in these that a critic must consume a wide variety of quality from their medium of choice, in fact rule number 2 states that even if they do consume a variety they might only publish reviews for the ones that the most people consider to be masterpieces. I would say that the critics don't have to specialize in the whole medium, it's okay if they focus on a specific genre or even subgenre. (and any critic that writes a review outside the genres he/she is familiar with is a fraud) |
| Origin of critics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4lUcjUv37A |
| Critics can do anything, doesn't really matter to me at all. |
| Anyone can be a critic, a lot people think being a critic means giving low scores to almost everything. At the end of the day critics are normal human beings just like everyone of us, the only real difference is that they are able to express them self properly and they can express why they lile or dislike a certain aspect in a anime in a clear and concise way, but never take their opinion as facts, they can't avoid being bias or having different taste, nor being a critic does not stop them from misunderstanding the plot or characters. Critics are people that are experience enough in a medium and are able to express themself easily, that is it. |
keragammingDec 8, 2016 2:27 AM
| In this world of layman-ness I don't think they will expertise-ing that far. |
 la critique de l'intention pure |
| Being a critic is a professional position, it's not a title handed to you because you criticised whatever anime is popular right now. Just because you cook a meal every day, doesn't mean you are a chef. "A critic is a professional who communicates an assessment and an opinion of various forms of creative works such as art, literature, music, cinema, theater, fashion, architecture, and food." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critic |
| They're are allowed to do whatever the fuck they want. There are no special rules in critiquing. Anyone can be a critic. Does cherry picking make them not qualify to be critics? No. There are no qualifications. But it sure does make them look like bad critics. |
  ♦ Anime List ♦ Manga List ♦ Friend Request ♦ Message Me ♦ DeviantArt ♦ |
| if pnly someone can enlighten me about this topic :( |
The world is cruel, ugly and pitiful. Let's watch anime and make it colorful |
| People are allowed to review what ever they want, doesn't matter if it's a "critic" or not. |
| People just write reviews for the shows they watch, and they cherrypick what they watch based on popular opinion because they're lazy and don't want to take risks. I don't think the two are particularly related. |
| I probably regret this post by now. |
| There is a difference between a casual critic and a REAL critic. Most of the people on this site that write reviews are casual critics. Emphasis on the casual. People who get paid or endorsed to write reviews and commentaries on series? They are likely a 'real' critic, at least by general standards. |
"I'd take rampant lesbianism over nuclear armageddon or a supervolcano any day." ~nikiforova |
| Being a critic is not hard, many jobs are way better and more respectful than being a critic. Critics are becoming overrated nowadays especially RottenTomatoes, look at their reviews, too positive with their criticism and cannot be trusted. People are giving the critics more respect than they deserve. A lot of people are better at reviewing than these professional critics who often get bribed and fear the press. LOL. OT: as long as they analyse critically what they are reviewing they are doing a critic's job. |
| People have inflated views on the role of critic because there's too many of them now, but people are actually morons if they think being a critic is "easy." As good a movie as it is, I fucking blame Ratatouille for the inane comment that being a critic is easy because all you do is write garbo about why something sucks. |
| I won't bother calling them critics but reviewers instead. People are allowed to review any anime they like and if they cherry pick popular anime, they can and allowed to do so. But it can also make they opinion worthless. Since you don't need someone to tell you that something that is popular, also tends to be good as that is something you can work out yourself. But it can come down to, "can I trust this person's review?" Usually the more exposure a person has to a media, the better informed that person should be. Since they are more likely to have experience the good, the bad and the ugly. Meaning that if they have experienced all sides of the media, they opinion should be more informed and more well-rounded. Therefore, be better able to give a more insightful review with comparisons. But of course there are exceptions to this tend to be plentiful, and more so in the age of the internet. |
| Critics who do detractions are detractors. A critic that praises a show through a pretentious drivel is a conceited fanatic. I am yet to see a real anime critic that gives sound critique. |
| Lol guys this has nothing to do with review. It's just that it sometimes bugs me when I see people claiming themselves to be a critic, easily giving a 1/10 for stuffs that isn't one of the worst stuffs that medium has to offer, or giving a 10/10 for stuffs that isn't one of the best stuffs the medium has to offer. Doesn't mean you can only have 1 1/10 and 1 10/10 too, just feels weird on people who can't treasure their 1/10 or 10/10. Konakana said: Let critics just review whatever they want. The material itself is irrelevant as long as the actually critiquing is sound. Simply taking the most critically acclaimed series in the medium and using them to attack other series which aren't proclaimed to be a "masterpiece" however, means nothing if the "critic" themselves cannot elaborate on why the series they are attacking is, as they say it, "bad," or doesn't quite live up to another series they compare it to. Watching some of the best in the medium and then posing to be critical is entirely different from attempting to criticize "lesser" series while actually having the ability to critique. The ability to explain why a given series is either great or not so great, is in essence, part of what makes a critic, a critic. Hmm I guess so? I agree that elaborations is all that matters but what I mean is if someone criticizing anime that is commonly described as good as "the worst thing ever" and refused to watch what is commonly described as that on the medium then isn't that means degrading that should've been in the average or better than average or even slightly lower than average works? It works on the opposite too, when a person overpraising something as "the best thing ever", I personally think that the person must watch all of the other things that can be considered masterpiece by many before claiming one, since with that you can compare with the other series on why that series is "the best thing ever" even if the other series were great in the person's opinion. But that's just my opinion. zombie_pegasus said: There are three rules for critics: 1. They must consume a fairly large number of titles from a medium (this amount varies depending on the medium) 2. They must publish their honest opinions on titles that they believe other people do or should care about the most 3. They must make money doing this As you can see there isn't any rule contained in these that a critic must consume a wide variety of quality from their medium of choice, in fact rule number 2 states that even if they do consume a variety they might only publish reviews for the ones that the most people consider to be masterpieces. Well isn't the rule #1 can also means that the person have already consumed a wide variety of quality of the medium? |
|
| A good critic expands his horizons. He can write off singles works, but a good critic isn't afraid to try things out of his comfort sound that may seem ludicrous. After all, criticism is about exploring whatever medium you're critiquing. A critic who doesn't push himself to new horizons is a critic whose vision will be limited, and thus less interesting. Uninteresting critics are useless critics. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
More topics from this board
Poll: » has the majority of people (here) seen the big 3 ? ( 1 2 3 )ame - Yesterday |
129 |
by EXCLMaker
»»
2 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Do you tend to watch newer seasonal shows, or older shows?Akuya - 3 hours ago |
11 |
by Soap
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » From what side of the neck do you enjoy being bitten by your vampire master?Catalano - 9 hours ago |
11 |
by TsutanaiFuun
»»
11 minutes ago |
|
» I made a fake anime seasonal chart using AI. Which of these sounds interesting to you? ( 1 2 )FFandMMfan - Apr 13 |
90 |
by FFandMMfan
»»
11 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Would you be in favor of tipping Crunchyroll for every anime you complete on their platform?Dije - Yesterday |
37 |
by TsutanaiFuun
»»
12 minutes ago |