EPT[Manga] One Piece - Page 1496
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
This is a thread that is dedicated to discussing One Piece. Do not read this thread if you are not currently caught up as there are spoilers in here. If an episode or a chapter has already been officially released, then it is not necessary to post using spoilers. If you have knowledge on a chapter that has not been officially released yet, do NOT post it in this thread. Ignoring this public note will result in a mod action. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8871 Posts
| ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
Just like One Piece has threaded together a fantastic epic that’s lasted for most of my lifespan AND ITS A LOTTA FUN GOSH DARNIT. | ||
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
| ||
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
| ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8871 Posts
On May 30 2019 01:03 Olli wrote: Things can be both awful and highly successful. That doesn't mean criticism of it is snobby, irrelevant or invalid. If your criteria are purely financial then yes, Avengers are some of the best movies of all time. If your criteria also contain any sort of intelligent or meaningful storytelling then they're mostly awful. It mostly depends on how you define and measure quality. A lot of people have standards that go beyond brain-dead entertainment. That doesn't make them snobs. the criteria isnt purely financial, the financials are simply a representation of how well the project satisfied the criteria of the public when it comes to movies or books. the idea that there can be an "objective criteria" in the first place is completely ludicrous as the only real criteria about whether something is good or bad is how its received by the public. everything else is like you said, subjective. you can have criticisms about the avengers or whatever else all you want, but the revenue figures will tell you that the avengers obviously satisfied the criteria of the majority of the public. if your personal criteria tells you that the avengers was a shit movie, you have a blatant minority opinion. if you think that this opinion gives you more weight over the majority because "the majority doesnt understand true film or literature", then you are literally being a snob. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
On May 30 2019 07:20 Dangermousecatdog wrote: What about The Last Jedi? Original expanded universe >>>>>> | ||
|
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
On May 30 2019 02:38 evilfatsh1t wrote: the criteria isnt purely financial, the financials are simply a representation of how well the project satisfied the criteria of the public when it comes to movies or books. the idea that there can be an "objective criteria" in the first place is completely ludicrous as the only real criteria about whether something is good or bad is how its received by the public. everything else is like you said, subjective. you can have criticisms about the avengers or whatever else all you want, but the revenue figures will tell you that the avengers obviously satisfied the criteria of the majority of the public. if your personal criteria tells you that the avengers was a shit movie, you have a blatant minority opinion. if you think that this opinion gives you more weight over the majority because "the majority doesnt understand true film or literature", then you are literally being a snob. This ignores the idea that people can pay to watch a movie and still find it terrible, which dilutes your criteria. I bet a ton of people watched the final Game of Thones season, and a lot found it awful. It also leaves out the fact that commercial success of movies is often caused by enormous marketing campaigns that some movies get and others don't. If you never hear about a movie, why would go watch it? But if Marvel spends months telling you to go watch THE BIGGEST MOVIE EVER, ENDGAME, you're going to take notice. And the general public is EXTREMELY susceptible to marketing campaigns. These campaigns also influence whether or not people enjoy the actual movie itself. If they're told it's awesome before they even see it, that changes the experience. Besides, whether or not the public is satisfied should never be the main criteria for anything. The broad public generally has no idea of the finer criteria of what makes something good or bad. Marvel movies, to continue with the example, have always struggled with character exploration and development, they've struggled with creating interesting storylines, and especially with creating powerful villains - until Thanos. Then there are cinematographic criteria, acting, etc. As with anything else, there are technical criteria in filmmaking as well. Look at it this way. The most popular newspapers are always tabloid media. From a journalistic standpoint (in terms of writing, reporting, titles, balancing sources, etc. ) however, they're usually dreadful and actually have tons of negative effects on the audience that consumes them. To argue that the only criteria should be popularity is a bit insulting to anyone who actually dedicates the time to perfecting their craft in detail rather than simply putting explosions on the screen. Not everyone aspires to be Michael Bay. If explosions and entertainment is all that matters we're a society of idiots. Which we are, to be sure, but not everyone finds that cool. And they're not snobs for it. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8871 Posts
also like i said previously, how people judge these things are completely up to themselves. its perfectly fair to say that you didnt enjoy avengers or harry potter against a specific set of criteria, but if you try to say they are "objectively bad" when youre in fact using subjective criteria, its a pretty dumb statement to make. were not talking about some science where the results are undeniable and those who are well qualified in the industry can make blanket statements with complete objectivity. the harry potter series is one of the most popular set of books in the world. you simply cannot just say those books are mediocre; the majority of the world would disagree with you. and back to my original point, when youre merely providing your opinion it is snobby if you think your opinion carries more weight than others in a field where so much is left to personal taste. go back and read the first two pages of comments that started this discussion. theres several guys there who claim to have read a variety of texts and "understand literature" and it took them less than a day to find disagreements because of differences in taste. objective my ass | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18648 Posts
| ||
|
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
And there are certain technical criteria in any field of work that have been refined and have been consensus in the relevant communities often for centuries, for good reason. Certain camera shots evoke certain emotions, for example. If they're misused, that makes an overall poor shot. Certain camera angles should not be cut to follow certain others because it irritates the viewer after decades of being drilled to watch movies differently. Any craft has certain criteria of what constitutes good or bad, otherwise there would be no point to the massive bodies of education that focus on things like filmmaking, acting, arts in general. They're open to innovation, of course. But the general public has absolutely no idea what it actually is that entertains them and what is being considered when a film is made. Criticism, however, does often focus on such aspects. It's not snobby at all. It's criticism of a product, much like people criticise anything else. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
If Diablo had a visual style that was more Sunshine and Rainbows it would be tonally dissonant and the people playing the game wouldn’t really understand the intended tone of the game. Almost no commercial artist that I can think of makes what they do with an, “eh, I feel like making this so this is how it’s going to be.” The kind of masturbatory art that divorces audience from artist is more the realm of fine arts, and even that nowadays is making an effort to care about an audience more. I’d also like to mention that any “rules” with art ARE there for a good reason, human beings commonly find certain things pleasant, or react in a certain way to things like complimentary color, and utilizing these things well is hard, that being said it’s worth considering that these rules aren’t ironclad, they’re rules because you’re intending to do a thing and the way causes the audience to feel that way, however by subverting the common rules you can do some pretty cool stuff if it’s well thought out and done well (breaking rules of cinematography and composition and color is rarely well done or intentional though.) I also agree that people don’t know or appreciate jack shit about what goes into what they enjoy or love or use, frankly, the world is art, from the chairs we sit in, the buildings around us, etc. it sure as hell isnt always good, but people could really stand to appreciate more of what goes into the world around them, even their butt ugly office furniture. Anyways, I like Marvel movies because they’re simpleminded, fun, and consistently employ some of the gods of Concept Art for their costume design, and the craft that goes into them is visually spectacular. Ditto for OP minus the employing Concept artists bit.  | ||
|
GettingIt
1656 Posts
| ||
|
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
On May 31 2019 05:46 GettingIt wrote: Hi - I am trying to find the One Piece manga thread. Is this it? no | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8871 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
| ||
|
RenSC2
United States1091 Posts
| ||
|
nojok
France15846 Posts
Rodin addresses the subject in an interesting way. His opinion is art should be about showing the truth, mostly inner truth. "Appealing to an audience is one of the absolute foundations of making any commercial art", it's shit, he vomits this. Art is beautiful when it shows character, when it's meaningful, it does not matter if the subject is beautiful or ugly, the artist can feel the meaning in everything and shows it (exemples from Rodin like Velazquez' painting of a dwarf + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Vel%C3%A1zquez_%E2%80%93_Buf%C3%B3n_don_Sebasti%C3%A1n_de_Morra_%28Museo_del_Prado%2C_c._1645%29.jpg/800px-Vel%C3%A1zquez_%E2%80%93_Buf%C3%B3n_don_Sebasti%C3%A1n_de_Morra_%28Museo_del_Prado%2C_c._1645%29.jpg) Oh well, my English is too poor to properly express those ideas, but this short book is worth the read if you're interested in the matter. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
ESPECIALLY ON A VIDEO GAME FORUM. Go tell Anthony Jones that his art isn’t art and is actually shit, or tell Renaud Galand, or Leslie Van Der Broeck, or Karla Ortiz, or Lars Grant-West, or Laurel Austin, or Wei Wang, Samwise Didier, Arnold Tsang, etc. etc. People pursuing what they do and love isn’t worthless or shit because the person isn’t a drunk who drips paint on canvas, or because the person doesn’t write detailed essays accompanying their art, or any other number of contrivances. “Meaning” in art is a dumbassed concept, frankly. | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
| ||
| ||
