I don't get it...

[deserteagleeye]

Lately the most baffling thing that's become popular to me is Kill la Kill. I know it's another anime from Trigger which would explain the initial popularity draw but it drops the ball so hard that I can't believe how people still stick with it. Especially the character Mako who people on this site I've once respected keep singing their praises over this Jar-Jar Binks reincarnate.

Dishonorable mention to Space Dandy which had an awesome 1st episode but just gets awkwardly worse every episode. It just executes their jokes and mood in a really off-putting way.

 

[Gorrath]

Ah yes, the Wine scene; easily bamboozled with four drops of red food coloring (<link=http://io9.com/wine-tasting-is-bullshit-heres-why-496098276>Exhibit B).

Anyways, I can fully agree with what you said, so I'd say that I can "get" why exclusive metalheads exist. Can't say I think it's a good idea, though.

I'm very glad you posted that link. It is full of every reason why I love and hate the wine scene. I drink what I like and pair it with what I like and the "experts" be damned. My social status and ego are not linked with what other people think I should drink. Wine elitists can go to hell and swill Carlo Rossi!

That said, I enjoyed talking to you and I agree that being exclusionary for ego's sake or for pretentious reasons is a terrible idea. It limits what one might expose themselves to, and that's a damned shame. Cheers mate.

 

[TakerFoxx]

I'm going to be as controversial as I can be, and say William Shakespeare.

Right off the bat, I must explain that I think Shakespeare was an exceptionally talented playwright. Absolutely. I love numerous plays of his.

What I don't understand is the sheer extent to which drama and education are weighted in his favour. It goes beyond the plays themselves. When he is near-unavoidable every year in English literature in school, something is off, because a gigantic number of playwrights and novelists are never approached at all.

It is disproportionate for an average English Lit student to have perhaps three or four or even five courses devoted to this one man over their entire school career, while Marlowe, Vonnegut, Peake, Asimov, and the entire genre of Fantasy probably don't even get one.

Some plays of his are also lent greater credence by the name alone, I am convinced. Measure for Measure is not on school syllabuses on merit.

I might be wrong about this, but I recall hearing somewhere is that the reason Shakespeare is so widely read is that his plays had the advantage of being equally popular among both the nobility and common people during his time, and after his death an inordinate amount of them were preserved through prompter copies when compared to those of his contemporaries, allowing for him to have a greater amount of influence on future writers. People like Marlowe and Jonson were brilliant, yes, and they've certainly made their mark on classic literature, but they (and note I'm purely hypothesizing here) lacked the universal appeal and the sheer amount of material left behind, whereas Asnimov, Peake, and Vonnegut just haven't been around long enough to have the same impact that Shakespeare had.

>_>

<_____>

<_________>

<______<

Metal.

I dun geddit. It's not as harsh as noise, it's not as melody-driven as classical, it's not as lyrically punchy as hip-hop, it's not as fun as pop, it's not as flowing as dance, it's not as technical as non-dance electronic, it's not as moody as ambient, and it's not as interesting as experimental stuff. It's the ultimate in "middling everything", with the only thing making it stand out is its volume.

That's not to say I don't appreciate metal or respect it as a decent music genre, but the sheer number of "metal or die" metalheads truly baffles me. Just... why? Electroheads and hip-hop addicts makes sense to me. Classical elitists make sense. I even get ravers. But metalheads? I dun geddit. I have to be in a very specific mood to really enjoy metal.

And if anyone's going to reflexively link me to Gojira (again) or Meshuggah (again) to show me what I'm missing, I'm going to reflexively link you to Blank Banshee, Aphex Twin, Jon Hopkins, Avicii, Azealia Banks, Pharmakon, Brian Eno, and Lizst. Just so you're warned.

I sort of agree, but at the same time I sort of get it as well. Personally, I'm into symphonic metal, which is a more melodic version that mixes classical and opera with metal and growling, and I really enjoy the contrast, but the really hardcore stuff doesn't do it for me. But then I went to a couple concerts where the opening acts were of the hardcore variety, and while it wasn't something I would listen to normally, there it just sort of clicked. There's this really aggressive energy the music creates, but at the same time it's channeled and focused into something...I dunno what the word is. Productive, I guess. But you really get swept up into the headbanging and moshing, which the music fuels an directs perfectly, and while you technically are doing things that are aggressive and even violent, mosh pit etiquette means you're more or less safe, even if you get a little bruised. And when the show's over, you feel really good and are best buds with everyone you just spent the last thirty minutes slamming yourself against.

So yeah, I can get why people get into the scene. It's sort of a safe way to channel and release anger and frustration.

 

[CelestDaer]

Interesting tidbit, I hear that apparently the store owner is, in fact, a homosexual. When you see a brief glimpse of his family, apparently his spouse was a man, and his children are therefore adopted. If that's the case, I can certainly see why Progressives are embracing the film. Still, I don't think it's fair to compare Frozen to The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, or even recent films like UP, which I do think were fairly brilliant, whereas Frozen felt somewhat average.

Ah, no... that's wishful thinking on the part of others, the guy in the sauna is never explicitly stated to be Wandering Oaken's spouse, in any way, shape, or form, for all we the audience know, he's a friend of the family who just happened to be visiting.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Breaking Bad, I suppose.

There's plenty of shows that I don't particularly like, but recognize the quality of, like Mad Men. Breaking Bad however is just all kinds of run-of-the-mill. It feels just one step above most crime shows on TV. It also makes excessive use of time lapses and montages, which come across as very cheap to me.

I wouldn't say it's a bad show, but definately not one possessing the quality many people seem to claim it has.

 

[Gorrath]

Hunt me down, if that's your fancy. However, you may find that the predator can become the prey...

In any case, eat what you want, but don't stand so close to me. In fact, stand far away. Downwind. In another state. On a different planet.

But I thank you, because you reminded me of another thing that I don't get. Well, to be fair, I do get it, but it annoys me: sports fans who use the word "we" when describing a professional sports team, or college team, or any sports team that they are rooting for, and yet are not on the team.

Yea, less accepting of the beans thing than this, but it still boggles my mind.

I've taken full measure of you non-bean-eating sorts and I fear not a one of you! My gaseous emissions shall scour the land of you lot, leaving only the bean-eating master race.

Ahem, that bit of nonsense and banter aside, I am one of those jerks who refer to sports teams as "we". You've said you understand why this is done but didn't elaborate so I'll just explain my reasoning for anyone else who might be curious, not out of a desire to labor you with that which you already get.

Personally, I use the term "we" when talking about my sports teams because of the strong emotional (and no small financial) investment in the team. Using "they" sounds so impersonal when I have so much at stake personally in how well "we" or "they" do. One might find such emotional investment in the fortunes of a sports team to be silly, and I totally understand why someone might look at all the ceremony and tears and ask themselves, "What the fuck is the big deal?" It goes back to what I was saying about identity. My identity is strongly linked to sports in general, having played sports since I was young. I think it's no surprise something linked to one's identity would lead one to include themselves when discussing "their" team.

 

[[Kira Must Die]]

Sonic. Anything Sonic.

I just don't see the appeal. Sure, the first couple are classics, but everything after that from what I heard, seen, read in reviews have been awful, yet the fanbase is still as huge than ever. Whenever I look at Sonic I just see a game franchise struggling to stay relevant, which is a problem I never get with Mario or Zelda.

Also, Studio Ghibli / Hayao Miyazaki.

Not that I think their movies are bad or anything, it's just that I could never get into any of them, and apparently that's a big shocker seeing how I'm a huge anime fan and even people who aren't into anime love these films and praise them for their visuals and storytelling. I get the visual part, but not really the storytelling, and I'm not sure why that is. I love FLCL, Madoka, K-ON!, Kill la Kill, stuff that otherwise turn people off of anime, but whenever Studio Ghibli comes up everyone screams hallelujah and I just can't muster up the energy to care. Again, I don't think their movies are bad, but every time I come out of them with the same feeling of "It's good *shrug* what do you want me to say? What can I say that everyone else hasn't said already?" I just can't get passionate about them. I can write a several paragraph review of, say, Madoka, but I struggle to come up with a sentence when it comes to a Ghibli film. They leave no impression on me.

 

[Silvanus]

I might be wrong about this, but I recall hearing somewhere is that the reason Shakespeare is so widely read is that his plays had the advantage of being equally popular among both the nobility and common people during his time, and after his death an inordinate amount of them were preserved through prompter copies when compared to those of his contemporaries, allowing for him to have a greater amount of influence on future writers. People like Marlowe and Jonson were brilliant, yes, and they've certainly made their mark on classic literature, but they (and note I'm purely hypothesizing here) lacked the universal appeal and the sheer amount of material left behind, whereas Asnimov, Peake, and Vonnegut just haven't been around long enough to have the same impact that Shakespeare had.

I'd agree about the impact on language and literature, though of course, it doesn't extent to numerous genres. I wouldn't say it accounts for the extent, though. Four-to-five courses dedicated to a single figure (while other major figures don't get approached) is disproportionate, unless they account for the majority of the material in the subject, which is never the case. Literature is just way too diverse for that.

 

[TakerFoxx]

I'd agree about the impact on language and literature, though of course, it doesn't extent to numerous genres. I wouldn't say it accounts for the extent, though. Four-to-five courses dedicated to a single figure (while other major figures don't get approached) is disproportionate, unless they account for the majority of the material in the subject, which is never the case. Literature is just way too diverse for that.

Can't really argue with that. They were probably just going for name recognition to get people to sign up for classes, as Marlowe's not all that well known outside of academic and literary circles, while everyone knows Shakespeare.

 

[Gorrath]

Also, MLP. I've seen a single episode, so I can't speak to the quality of the show. It could be good, it could be great. There no way that its quality substantiates how popular it is. hell, ever from the perspective that a lot of the reason its popular is because its a counter-culture fad and/or because of this self-aware irony that they're grown adults enjoying a show written for seven year old girls, it still can't possibly account for its immense popularity.

Let me preface this by saying I do not consider myself a "Bronie". I don't think there's anything inherently wrong in being a "Bronie" but I do not have the level of personal investment in the show to label myself that way. That said, I have watched every episode available on Netflix and I love the show. I find it to be of good quality, it's amusing and the characters are likeable. It's not for everyone.

As one would expect, many of the themes are childish and the messages simplistic, but for what it is, I find it supremely satisfying. I don't watch it out of some sort of sense of irony. I'd have never touched it except that my wife is into ponies like I'm into transformable robots. I watch it because, despite the odds, it's well crafted enough to be pleasing, simple in a way that's fun and contrary to what you might think, it does not give the show enough credit to say that it's written solely for seven year old girls. I speculate when I say that I believe it it is intentionally written to appeal to the very people who have made it massively popular. That's my 2 cents!

 

[Coppernerves]

Bioshock

How am I supposed to give a damn about these little sisters and Tenenbaum and this Atlas fellow when I have nothing to eat but junk food, nothing to drink but strong filter coffee, wine and whiskey, and the whole place seems like it could come crashing down on me any minute?

EDIT: That's not to say I didn't save the little sisters, sure without so many plasmids I'll end up back in the revitaliser more times, but for saving my arse I need all the friends I can get.