Criticisms your'e sick of seeing in a film/story

Drauger

New member
Dec 22, 2011
190
0
0
Helmholtz Watson said:
RaikuFA said:
Any JRPG, no matter how good or bad, will always have one ass-wipe reviewer go "It's a JRPG therefore it sucks." And yes, this person is paid to review games this badly.
Are you referring to Yahtzee? lol

Seriously though, I think JRPG's would get less crap if they dropped that horrible turn-based combat system. It's 2013, please update your combat system and join the rest of the world. Keep your crazy male haircuts, giant swords, angsty characters, anime art style, focus on teenagers and children as main characters, bishonen guys, Japanese view of Christianity, and other cultural differences, but please drop the outdated turn-based combat system. The only game I think that gets a pass on this is the Pokemon series, and I say that as someone who hasn't cared about Pokemon since I was 10years old.
You know? the thing I like the most from jrpg's is the turn based combat system, and I believe is what most people that like jrpgs , like about'em, just my opnion.

unLucky500 said:
Mine would be:

"Superman killed Zod, they ruined Superman forever. WAAA!"
Yup this came to my head when I read the post, I would add:

Superman is to dark and gritty and he didn't save anyone in the movie.
 

CManator

New member
Nov 8, 2010
151
0
0
I used to get so mad at the people who complained about the lack of extra features in a given game. Saying it would be nice to have is one thing, but lack of is imo not a valid complaint.

- New game +: So, you are angry that you can't godstomp lv1 goblins with your ultimate dickpunch spell you got in the final dungeon? Fair enough, but if it doesn't add anything and removes challenge, why should they waste resources implementing it. Some games do it well but that doesn't mean every games need it.

- Easy Mode in Dark Souls: This has been argued to death, but my stance is this particular series would not benefit from easy mode. Not even as an option.

- Backwards compatibility: I can think of only 4 and a half systems that had it(excluding handhelds and pc), now all of a sudden it's a dealbreaker? Yes it would be a lovely addition to any system, and a good selling point, but it's not necessary, apparently difficult to implement, and doesn't include the entire previous system's library.

Those are the examples that came to mind. I understand wanting them, but i think some folks make too big a deal over it. I can't really think of many movie criticisms I hate, but then again I stopped caring about movies and tv years ago.
 

MetricFurlong

New member
Apr 8, 2010
81
0
0
It's not so much a criticism as it is a label/word but the term 'pretentious' seems to be getting thrown a hell of a lot more than it should. It seems to be slapped on just about anything that attempts to try and say something - whether that be a philosophical issue or a statement about the medium the work exists in - place strong emphasis on it's themes or present information in ways which aren't glaringly obvious. As if trying to engage the audience on an intellectual level, giving them something to consider beyond what's immediately going on in the story, is something to be ashamed of on some level.
 

CManator

New member
Nov 8, 2010
151
0
0
Shanicus said:
'I didn't like this film, it wasn't like the book/earlier adaptations' - NO, FUCK YOU, FUCK YOUR FACE, FUCK YOUR FAMILY AND THEN FUCK YOURSELF AGAIN WITH YOUR FAMILY.

ADAPTATIONS OF WORKS ARE AMAZING AND AWESOME AND YOU SHOULD JUDGE THEM ON THEIR OWN MERITS AND NOT ON THE MERITS OR RELATIONS OF THE ORIGINAL WORKS (unless the new adaptation just mimics the older one completely, i.e. Oldboy). EVEN IF AN ADAPTATION IS TERRIBLE, YOU JUDGE IT AS A TERRIBLE FILM/BOOK/COMIC/WHATEVERTHEFUCK, NOT AS A TERRIBLE ADAPTATION OF WHATEVER SHIT YOU'RE BUSY FANBOYING OVER.

FUCK. ING. CHRIST.

*cough* so yeah, that's my most irritating criticism I find towards films/books/alternate media. Having people go 'Oh, Memento was a terrible movie because it didn't follow the original short story close enough' is stupidly frustrating, as they avoid viewing the movie in it's own rights and judging it on what it does/doesn't do right cinematically, instead judging it by their own stupidly-high standard set by their reaction to the original material.
I make this complaint when important details are left out in the transition. It can't be helped when cramming a 900 page book into a 2 hour movie, but it can be very noticable.

Still, most of those complaints boil down to preferring one interpretation over the other. But comparisons will always be made, may as well accept it. If you are going to stray too far from the source material, you may as well change the title while you're at it. Just my 2c.
 

Helmholtz Watson

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,503
0
0
trty00 said:
Helmholtz Watson said:
Except... Hollywood is undoubtedly biased towards the white male. I mean, how many big movies came out this with black men as the sole protagonist? I can think of two, The Butler, and 12 Years a Slave, the latter of which is far from being a contemporary story and can practically write itself.
And? That doesn't mean that they should start changing the race of the character just to meet some arbitrary quota.

trty00 said:
This is especially true in current superhero movies; there was ONE black person in The Avengers. ONE. Like it or not, Samuel L. Jackson was the token black person. I think in this case, when the racial landscape is undeniably uniform, I think it's okay to race-swap a character whose race has never been a part of their personality.
Again, the lack of Black characters in superhero movies currently out doesn't justify changing the characters race to meet some arbitrary quota. What they should do instead is make more movies with superheros that are already Black, instead of just resorting to lazy writing and just changing the race of a non-Black character.

trty00 said:
Besides, in the Thor films they're not actually gods, they're aliens, and they clearly have a multi-cultural society, and why wouldn't you want Michael B. Jordan as the Human Torch? He's a great actor!
That's a pitfall excuse, nothing more. If the Norse Gods were trademarked characters, the owner would have sued Marvel over using their likeness. As for the Human Torch, he is a white guy. As I said, I've nothing against Mr. Jordan, I just wish that they would put him in a movie like Static Shock instead.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Helmholtz Watson said:
I would like to see less of Idris Elba pretending that a Norse God is a Black guy
I would like to see less of people pretending the Norse only had white folk in their pantheon. It's hard to take complaints about Thor seriously when they had deities described as dark-skinned.

Ignoring the fact that we're talking fictional characters in the first place. Ignoring that nobody cares that they speak Shakespearian prose.

Drauger said:
You know? the thing I like the most from jrpg's is the turn based combat system, and I believe is what most people that like jrpgs , like about'em, just my opnion.
I think that's also what a good chunk of people hate about them. If you can't quickscope it then teabag it, a lot of people just don't care.

Yup this came to my head when I read the post, I would add:

Superman is to dark and gritty and he didn't save anyone in the movie.
How silly. This is a re-imagined Superman for a modern era. He should carry guns and have a skull on his chest.
 

[Kira Must Die]

Incubator
Sep 30, 2009
2,537
0
0
"There is no story!" Usually when referring to anything slice of life or anything simply about one's daily life.

This mostly comes from people who seem like they absolutely, positively NEED their movies/shows to have a traditional narrative or plot. I just don't see it as a valid criticism, especially when that's the whole point of not just the movie, but the genre as a whole. It's just a matter of whether it's the kind of thing that works for you or not. Also, I don't see how ones person's life isn't considered a "story."

Also, people who hate dubs just because they're dubs. I don't even accept the fact that most english dubs suck, because I liked most of the dubs I've listened to.

Or hell, any complaint about a remake, reboot, or dub that is basically "It's not as good as the original, therefore it automatically sucks." Or the assumption that the people behind those are deliberately trying to replace the original, stating that they can do it better when nothing of the sort has been said or even implied.
 

Dalisclock

Making lemons combustible again
Legacy
Escapist +
Apr 18, 2020
7,440
2,093
118
Country
United States
Gender
Male
delta4062 said:
That Avatar sucked because it was basically "Pocahontas in space". Yeah it was unoriginal...so? It was still an entertaining movie.

Unoriginal doesn't make it bad. Also the whole 3D hate. Get the fuck over it already.
I didn't hate avatar, I just didn't think it was super awesome like it was being hyped for a long time. Oh, it looks really pretty, but it's nothing terribly special. It's also really wierd when people(mostly the fox news crowd) kept seeing political agendas in it.

Also, the hate usually isn't against 3d, but rather when 3d is done badly and looks fake. A lesser, though sometimes important issue, is that it's harder for actors to respond appropriatly to a green screen then something they can actually see. Or if a character is CGI and not there, it's hard to deal with that.

It's why voice acting can be difficult because most of the time voice actors record their lines in isolation, so they often have only their half of the conversation to work from, which is not how people normally have conversations.
 

sXeth

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
2,636
114
68
CManator said:
- Backwards compatibility: I can think of only 4 and a half systems that had it(excluding handhelds and pc), now all of a sudden it's a dealbreaker? Yes it would be a lovely addition to any system, and a good selling point, but it's not necessary, apparently difficult to implement, and doesn't include the entire previous system's library.
The people citing PC as the great be-all answer to this problem is a big one too. Its gotten *somewhat* easier to do in modern times, but its still significantly likely that to get a game 5, 10, 15, 20 years old working on your PC is gonna involve massive amounts of configuration resetting, workarounds, scouring about for emulators, and whatall.
 

Imperioratorex Caprae

Henchgoat Emperor
May 15, 2010
5,499
0
0
Helmholtz Watson said:
Gromril said:
I see allot of old criticisms being brought up whenever someone mentions a favourite story/film. Often, they are valid and well thought out. Other times, they are recycled arguments that have been used by people who cant think of their own one or a better one. Whatever the reason, be it righteous indignation or good old fan boy rage, such repeated criticism can drive me insane.

So I put it to you, oh mighty escapist forum community, to bring forth the ones you hate.
The criticism I hate is over the issue of how all the superheores are White men, and that is wrong/unfair, so its ok to change the race of a superhero because otherwise all the superheroes would be White(which is inaccurate). It irritates me because as a fan of Spawn, I would like to see less of Idris Elba pretending that a Norse God is a Black guy, and insteadI would LOVE to see Idris Elba in the Blockbuster role of Al Simmons and star in Spawn trilogy(which could be directed by Christopher Nolan[footnote]Hopefully Mr. Nolan could take his skills from making three great Batman movies and use it to make three great Spawn movies. Hopefully he would be the director, and not somebody like Michael Bay or Silent Bob.[/footnote])! Seriously, its not just lazy writing to change the race of already established characters, its also insulting for those of us that are already fans of non-White superheroes like Spawn. Please Hollywood, stop trying to change characters like Heimdall and Johnny Storm, and instead start making movies about Spawn(starring Idris Elba) and Static [from Stack Shock](starring Michael B. Jordan).
I'll agree with you to a point. I'll go even as far as to say I didn't see Heimdall as a black guy working to begin with. Then Elba nailed it, and made me rethink the part a bit and the idea that character's race unless its specific to background (Black Panther for example wouldn't work as a white guy, neither would changing Storm to an Asian girl, etc.) isn't for the most part relevant. I actually at one point would look at trading cards I had of Marvel Characters and note a lazyish design similarity of Nick Fury and Mr. Fantastic. Take off the eyepatch of the old Nick and he does resemble Mr. Stretchpants a good bit, if a little more grizzled.
However when they changed Fury in the comics (in the Ultimates universe prior to the movie) to a black guy, it gave me a little more investment in his character. And yes he was modeled after Sam Jackson, but not because he was already playing Fury, rather the basis was a catalyst for Mr. Jackson to secure the role in any movies made containing Fury. And he does it with his usual flair and style, which fits the character in my view.
Now back to Elba, I love his portrayal of Heimdall and don't begrudge the casting one bit. Now this leads me to feel that having race not trump acting ability is a good idea as long as its not too much a departure from the character. BTW Heimdall was so ancillary a character it really didn't matter much and I would have forgotten about it altogether anyway except that Elba was damn damn good.
However I would agree he'd also be interesting as Al Simmons, as long as the writing and directing of another movie was decent. Just don't let Todd MacFarlane write it... ;)
Anyway, I can still say that not every character would benefit from a racial rewrite and most would suffer especially if it became a habit. Its not a bad thing to have diversity, but not for the sake of diversity or racial ass-kissing. A character must stand on its own merit, and not be the token x-race because "we need moar".
Sidebar: Part of me really hates one fact of this Marvel film universe, its missing so many possibilities because of other studios owning film rights... I mean I'd love to see the worlds cross-over even if its a minor mention in the background like a news story about mutants during an Avengers scene or during the inevitable Infinity Gauntlet having the effects of the conflict touch each of the different parts of the universe in some way. Thats what I loved about Marvel.
 

ShogunGino

New member
Oct 27, 2008
290
0
0
Something that really gets me is that the Internet doesn't like to deal with someone found the Star Wars prequels and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull to be enjoyable, despite their flaws. Mostly due to nostalgia being given FAR more emphasis by modern audiences that possibly ever before, because we have nearly all media available to us whenever we want.

The Star Wars nuts can't help themselves from posting the link to RedLetterMedia's reviews of the prequels (which I dislike because, despite some good points, acting like a complete asshat in your reviews tends to kill how much I can take you seriously) before /threading the article, and wiping their hands clean of the matter, as if one person's opinion is now all of a sudden fact, and it justifies their overblown hatred.

On a related note, I can't stand people who think that old classics are now automatically immune to modern critique. I hate the idea of 'critic-proof' movies just because its 'old' and 'classic'. Now, contextualization is very important in enjoying old movies, and I always consider the time it was made, but age is not a good excuse for why somethings are badly made. Nor should a movie's age and vast popularity protect from any later critique.

That said, I personally think the original Star Wars trilogy has gotten an obscene amount of overpraise, and, yes, while I fully understand the futility of criticizing them in the face of their massive popularity, I will still say that I think Empire Strikes Back had crappy romantic dialog and poor performances between Leia and Han, the AT-ATs are stupidly designed vehicles of war, the fight scene on Hoth was poorly paced, everyone on the Falcon should have been sucked into space when they stepped out while inside the asteroid-worm, Yoda's introduction was not a good way to introduce him, Han Solo was a whiny bastard until they start to head to Cloud City, and that Luke should not have survived that fall after he finds out Vader is his father.

But I'm not allowed to say any of that because CHILDHOOD!!

Also, I'm not a fan of people who just bash CGI just because 'its not real'. I am a fan of all effects and animation. I study the history of animation, and it really irks me when someone calls CG 'soulless' or 'cheap' or 'charmless', simply for being. Yes, it is true that computer generated imagery is not physically there on camera, and I agree that some things are more effective with something physical there, but instant disgust over the fact that it is simply used in a movie just makes me frustrated.

Often, these people just look at the fact that CG is used and never mention pacing, editing, screen direction, and how well it interacts with the actual physical objects on screen. For me, effects wise, if any effect, even physical ones, aren't executed with a certain degree of care, will not be considered 'convincing' by me. And it most definitely doesn't feel less 'warm' than practical effects, because the same standards are held by me no matter what effect style it is. Just because its practical does NOT mean it gets a free pass from me.

Perhaps its because I grew up watching movies and shows with lots of different effects and techniques, and that I've studied how to do both traditional and digital animation before, but I just have a lot more appreciation for everything that goes into CG. Which is why hate it when someone just calls it 'cheap', when I know that it had to be designed on paper first, approved, built in 3D as a model, approved, given textures and colors, approved, given a skeletal rig that requires constant tweaking, animators working at a full 24/30/60 frames per second as CGI is always on ones, with lighters and prop designers making sure the animated creature can interact with its environments well, and THEN a final render which always takes a long time...well, 'cheap' is a very poor word to describe ALL of CGI to me.
 

Astoria

New member
Oct 25, 2010
1,887
0
0
Gromril said:
I see allot of old criticisms being brought up whenever someone mentions a favourite story/film. Often, they are valid and well thought out. Other times, they are recycled arguments that have been used by people who cant think of their own one or a better one. Whatever the reason, be it righteous indignation or good old fan boy rage, such repeated criticism can drive me insane.

So I put it to you, oh mighty escapist forum community, to bring forth the ones you hate.

For me? The whole "Lulz why didn't the eagles just fly them to the mountain?" from the hobbit. Of the top of my head? How about smaug (you know, the freaking Dragon that lives there) being one of the few things in universe that would pass for a natural predator for a giant eagle. Cant imagine they want to go anywhere near that thing.

Also, maybe, just maybe, giant birds have different motivations and thought processes to bipedal mammal folk. I don't know Gandalf's relationship with them, beyond his ability to call in a favour from them occasionally if there is no other way for him to accomplish something (Not being dead, saving lives ect)
If I remember correct Gandalf did ask them to take them there but they said it would be dishonourable to them as they'd been seen as servants or something.

It annoys me that people keep saying that Inception was too confusing. What was confusing about it! The deeper you go in sleep, the slower time is. The deeper in sleep, the more their influence has an effect. That's not that difficult to get is it?
 

Terminate421

New member
Jul 21, 2010
5,773
0
0
People do this to the Halo games all the time:

"There is no story! Nothing is explained!"

Because we need a narrator telling exposition to explain everything that happens right? If you're lost on the story of Halo 3, then go play the other 2! Simple as that! A sequel this late into a franchise shouldn't have to hold hands on the story!

On top of that, some people hate it for the lack of characters. Bullfuckingshit. Master Chief may not say much but he clearly has his own personality, Sgt. Johnson, Cortana...hell, in one game alone without context, I can pick up on all the character's personalities. I actually REPLAYED all the Halo games this summer and found myself still enjoying each of the characters, it's not about them fucking crying their feelings, it's about subtleties in movement or the way they say their lines. They don't need a Mass Effect level opportunity about a conversation of their favorite cereal to know a character

On top of that, even then. My most hated argument I ever see about Halo is that "It's Generic"



Name one game in the past 5 years that plays even remotely close to Halo. You can't come up with one.

The only I can THINK of by technicality is Bioshock: Infinite. And that's fucking pushing it.

It alone is it's own genre of shooter in a genre plagued with shooter rip-offs and attempts to be call of duty. I doubt that's considered generic.

Fuck me, I needed to rant.
 

Shadow flame master

New member
Jul 1, 2011
519
0
0
Anything that boils down to nostalgia and childhood. Maybe it's because I was born in 1994, but I don't that much attachment to most of the media that I've consumed over the years. That's why I see the hate Michael Bay gets for making the Transformers movies as fucking stupid. The Transformers themselves would not look anything like the ones you saw on the Generation 1 show because a living sentient mechanical being that has been engaged in war with another half of its race would look, I don't know, more WAR LIKE, how about DANGEROUS.

Then there's the too 'kiddy' response to some movies and games. First off, almost anything made by Disney will have at least 5 to 20 minutes of depressing scenes or have a general theme in the movie that says something along the lines like "If you honestly believed we wouldn't go this far, then you're an idiot."

This applies to the Kingdom Hearts series too, it is a partnership game with Disney and Square Enix, a game company that gave you Xenogears. I mean let's forget that the game has themes about dealing with loss of friendship, a potential loved ones death, philosophical questions dealing with matters of the heart and whether or not one should exist or is allowed to exist, suicide, and other things.

Let's also forget that the main villain of the series is a man who wishes to "create an apocalypse to see what happens." He has systematically broken lives, friendships, homes and worlds all in the name of the creation of a weapon that is said to be the key to the universe, or what created the universe. He also has a tendency to body-jack people and posses them as well.

But besides all of this, Kingdom Hearts is too kiddy to be taken seriously. Fuck you. With a rusty dildo.