This is a board for topics that don't fit on other boards, but that are still otaku/hobby related.
[Return]
Posting mode: Reply
Name
Email
Subject   (reply to 34992)
Message
BB Code
File
File URL
Embed   Help
Password  (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: BMP, EPUB, GIF, JPEG, JPG, MP3, MP4, OGG, PDF, PNG, PSD, SWF, TORRENT, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 7000 KB.
  • Images greater than 260x260 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 3339 unique user posts.
  • board catalog

File 158964068454.jpg - (381.87KB , 667x979 , __drawn_by_misaki_chess08__sample-86f9678484edefbc.jpg )
34992 No. 34992 [Edit]
What do you think about reviews as a form of entertainment, and more broadly, mixing information with entertainment? What started out as a way for people to know if a product was worth buying or not has branched out into different genres of people stating and explaining their opinions on things which people consume not for their functional value, but for their own sake and because of cult of personality. There's no hard line between review, essay and opinion piece anymore. Siskel and Ebert might be an early example of this shift, were people tuned in more for their personality dynamic than to find out if they should watch a movie or not, but they were still called reviews. Redlettermedia pioneered the internet, video form of this, and now everybody in that circle uses variations of their format and jokes. Then there's stuff like that guy with the glasses, people who made things barely resembling a review, but called themselves critics. In written form, anime blogs were doing the same kind of thing. People eat it up.
Expand all images
>> No. 34993 [Edit]
>>34992
I think people like Ebert just watched every movie out there and tell to others if they liked it or not in more or less words. He even recognized that, he disliked entire genres. As I see it a review should be good enough so I could enjoy it more after I have experienced the thing is reviewed. Like telling me details I didn't notice, the context, importance, how it was produced, interpretations. So you obligatory need to review stuff you know well and you're passionate about it, even if it ends being shit.
Because of this, the reviewer is the last important thing in a review.
>> No. 34994 [Edit]
I have not ever watched these review shows you talk about, but heres what I think.
Reviews, first of all, should not be about grades, like x/10 or x stars. If I like the theme of a movie or consider some aspects of cinematography more important to others, I will give different grades to 2 movies, even if they are "equally" well-made. THe numbers also distract from the reality, everyone just says oh that movie got a full score, or 90 percent, and don't even read whats bad or good about the movie. Reviewers should not use grades. It also generates that ranking-everything culture.
How do you feel about spoilers? I don't watch reviews beforehand and just go straight into whatever it is I want to watch. Do poeple want detailed reviews with spoilers or no?
>>34993
>Because of this, the reviewer is the last important thing in a review.
I don't understand. Your statement looks a very contradictonry one.
>> No. 34995 [Edit]
>>34994
What I meant is I'm not interested in the personal life of the reviewer or if he liked the thing or not because whatever personal prefference. I see the review as a work of investigation, journalism. etc.
>> No. 34996 [Edit]
File 158965109363.jpg - (136.89KB , 850x575 , __violet_evergarden_violet_evergarden_drawn_by_hop.jpg )
34996
>>34994
>How do you feel about spoilers?
It depends on what i'm using the "review" for. If i'm reading it to guess whether i'd enjoy something or not because I might watch it, spoilers are annoying but I can put up with them since I care more about how the story gets there than specific events. If i'm consuming a "review" for something I already watched or don't plan on watching, spoilers are actually a plus since it lets the review be a complete substitute. Most "reviews" in that format mix an entire plot summary with commentary, criticism and comedy. I'd rather call those essays. The subject is almost always something the "reviewer" didn't like too. It's a negativity feeding thing. Some are better than others.
>> No. 34997 [Edit]
When I read or watch entertainment-type reviews it's only for things I don't care about. Otherwise it's unbearable.
I can't stand having to sift through filler when I only care about dry information on this one specific thing.
Worst case is when I can't find a better source than some douchefag who goes out of his way to display what a mouthy asshole they are. These people don't care about providing information to others. Their reviews are an excuse, they do what they do to interact with their audience, to display and receive specific signals and wink wink nod nods. It's mostly a one way communication so they don't get to choose who watches their videos, but I know full well that in person they would shit all over someone like me.
I just feel dirty when I have to depend on hostile assholes for information. Having no choice but to abide by their bullshit in return for a scrap of knowledge is degrading. It's like I'm further enabling and validating them by giving them clicks and sitting through their routine of one sided jabs.
Makes me feel like shit.
>> No. 34998 [Edit]
File 158966240177.jpg - (96.26KB , 850x637 , __madotsuki_yume_nikki_drawn_by_tamo_imai__sample-.jpg )
34998
>>34997
I didn't know anybody watched them for information. Pretty much any wiki is a better source for that. Articles, interviews. Information on a work of art is best when it comes from people involved in its production and, hopefully, reliable documenters. What would a secondary entertainer know that you couldn't find out yourself?
>> No. 34999 [Edit]
>>34998
I wasn't talking about works of art and entertainment.
Every object you see can be a subject of a review or a test. Anything related to these items can also be reviewed. The materials they're made from, the machines used to make them, the processes utilized in their manufacture, the methods of employing the items, the tools and techniques needed to maintain or alter these objects in every imaginable way.
Take something as simple as a piece of paper. For most people the material's sole function is defined by its ability to retain notes, which most paper naturally does. However in some applications all of the aspects I mentioned earlier are going to affect the material's performance.
I know it can all be critical information to some printmakers or calligraphers. I don't know how these specific groups behave and interact on the internet and I don't know if knowledge relevant to them is being compiled in wiki or any other accessible format. Knowing other niche stuff though I have reasons to doubt it.
Some of the things I'm interested in (or just need to learn for whatever reason) aren't covered by robust and open online communities. Some are the very opposite, populated by people eager to deny their knowledge to the uninitiated for a multitude of reasons, one of them being the mindset of "I won't tell you how to do thing because then you won't pay me to do thing".
I'm poor so I can't afford to learn by hands-on expeience. I have to rely on others sharing their knowledge. Unfortunately a lot of people who know stuff can't help but be complete cunts about it. It's very depressing to me when some of them flaunt their assholery on youtube or whatever, and are rewarded for it by following and popularity.
>> No. 35000 [Edit]
>>34999
Oh. People try and make technical reviews entertaining too? I thought those would have to be very dry. I can't image somebody joking around about power tools or paint brushes or CAD software.
>> No. 35004 [Edit]
>>34999
Youtubers suck.
>> No. 35053 [Edit]
I like hearing people talk about things they are very passionate about, that all i need from a review. I tend to like more personal blogs, i particularly enjoy the written form and don't care much for videos honestly, than professional reviewers.
>> No. 35072 [Edit]
A review in video format is a total waste of time and I see no reason to ever watch one. George Orwell, now known as a famous novelist was in his own time considered the greatest book reviewer alive. Just as he retired he wrote an essay titled "Confessions of a Book Reviewer" where he explained how and why he didn't even bother reading a lot of the stuff he reviewed. I highly recommend that essay and it is freely available online. It's a simple fact that if someone is financially dependent on writing reviews and pushing out content constantly they are going to end up writing some trash no matter how good they are. I think this is the crux of the problem.
>> No. 35073 [Edit]
>>35072
What if they do it for free?
>> No. 35702 [Edit]
>>34992
>reviews as a form of entertainment
It's what you need to do for good info on Amazon shops these days.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24196237
5 or 1 stars tells you nothing!

View catalog

Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason  


[Home] [Manage]



[ Rules ] [ an / foe / ma / mp3 / vg / vn ] [ cr / fig / navi ] [ mai / ot / so / tat ] [ arc / ddl / irc / lol / ns / pic ] [ home ]