Forum - View topicQuality and Entertainment: A Fine Line.
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Alan45
 Village Elder Posts: 9877 Location: Virginia |
|
|||
|
@Key
I agree quality and entertainment are two separate aspects of a show. They are related in the sense that if quality is bad enough that you notice it instead of enjoying the show it will ruin the entertainment. However, quality production values including writing, no matter how close to perfect, will ever compensate for a lack of entertainment. Further, what is entertaining is entirely subjective. If I don't care for the subject matter, I'm not going to watch the show no matter how well praised it is. What I was getting to above is that for me, if I find a show entertaining I really don't care what the "objective" quality is. Obviously the quality is good enough or I couldn't watch it. I read reviews to find out what a show is about. If the premise is one I like, I don't really care what the reviewer or the discussion thread say about it. It may turn out that what seems to be a good story is ruined in the execution, but that is the chance I take. I've been more disappointed by shows I was iffy about that I let others talk me into. |
||||
|
||||
Blood-
Bargain Hunter Posts: 23888 |
|
|||
|
Cowboy Bebop is my "objectively I can see the quality and oh boy I couldn't care less because this show just ain't doing it for me."
I share Akane's irritation with those who can't overcome their "PPF" and label things as bad simply because they don't jibe with it. However (and I hate to hijack Akane's thread) my real pet peeve when it comes to feedback are those twits who go ridiculously overboard in their criticism of a show. Every little thing is nitpicked and blown up like it was some huge cardinal sin. There are posters I simply don't read any more because 99.9 per cent of their comments are this kind of assinine drivel. |
||||
|
||||
|
Key
Moderator
 Posts: 18252 Location: Indianapolis, IN (formerly Mimiho Valley) |
|
|||
|
Oh, I don't consider that a thread hijack at all; in fact, I think it's related, salient point.
Virtually anything widely-considered high-quality can be nitpicked to death if someone tries hard enough; hell, even a nearly universally-acclaimed movie like Schindler's List sometimes takes guff for having needless nudity in it. I think one or all of three things are happening in the cases you describe, Blood-: the poster has an agenda, is desperate to justify why they don't like something as much as others do, and/or is simply failing to appreciate that quality is not necessarily synonymous with perfection, but rather a case where the well-made elements so outweigh the flaws that the latter become trivial to the overall evaluation. And the latter is a big part of why NGE still gets such praise despite some undeniable flaws. (And for GalicianNightmare: one thing you have to keep in mind about NGE is that the original series was groundbreaking on its artistic style. Titles which do that tend to get a bit of leeway. It's also a case of "what it animates, it animates well.") As to series which I recognize as good but can't appreciate at all in an entertainment sense, one need look no further than last season's Yuri Kumi Arashi. Boy, I didn't "get" that one, not one bit, even though I can recognize that it was put together purposefully and artfully. |
||||
|
||||
Kruszer
 Posts: 7987 Location: Minnesota, USA |
|
|||
|
I am in it, very much so , to be entertained. I'm not the critical type. If I'm not enjoying something I simply don't watch it, and that's the end of the matter. I don't hold other people to my standards, and complain when they don't like something I like or like something I dislike, but I do ask that they at least be civil and rational about their criticism.
I have very little interest in analyzing what I watch, unless it's in a set list of genres or contains subject matter where it's more enjoyable when the brain is switched on. I have more fun when I just let the story take me to where it wants to go.
Totally. I also find the soap-boxing agitators incessantly annoying. There really needs to be an "ignore" toggle for certain posters on this forum. |
||||
|
||||
BodaciousSpacePirate
 Subscriber Posts: 3018 |
|
|||
|
I think that it is important to always remember that every anime is someone's "best show ever made", and that there are a lot of reasons for liking a show. For example, I am much more likely to forgive a show's "flaws" if it features a LGBT protagonist - like this season's Mikagura School Suite - but I'll avoid a show if I personally find a LGBT protagonist's depiction to be callous or mean-spirited - like Maria+Holic.
I break my own rules all the time, though. I hate most anime romance shows, but I like every episode of Amagami SS. I can't stand the amount of fanservice in the Index anime, but I absolutely love the light novels... even though they contain waaaaaaaaay more fanservice than the show does. Even the way you can evaluate a particular aspect of a show is open to interpretation: Paul Jensen thinks that Mikagura's animation falls apart during its action scenes, but I think those are the show's prettiest moments. It really depends on what you're looking for, and how you're looking for it. |
||||
|
||||
|
Blood-
Bargain Hunter Posts: 23888 |
|
|||
That's all true, but I think that in some of the cases I'm talking about, these people simply do not understand how to give something its proper weight. I have no problem with someone saying, "okay, this is a minor thing but it really drove me nuts" versus someone who acts as if the minor thing is this huge deal that invalidates every single thing the show does right. Also, I get the impression these negative Nancies feel they are imbued with a sense of judgment and discernment that is superior to those of us who don't react with savagery to a perceived flaw. They are uncompromising arbiters of quality, man. 
|
||||
|
||||
|
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 9877 Location: Virginia |
|
|||
|
@Blood-
Yes, it seems at though the most nit picky ones are those most likely to state their opinions as though they were divinely revealed truth. No suggestion that anyone could even dare to have a different take on the show. |
||||
|
||||
jl07045
 Posts: 1527 Location: Riga, Latvia |
|
|||
The distinction asks for elaboration here. Let's say you break down a creative work to its components. Let's take the art. You propose that the art is well-made. How do you judge it? The two most obvious ways are: 1) you find it good, when compared with art in other works based on your personal experience; 2) you appeal to authorities - well-known artists or critics and such. Or it can be a mix of both of course. If 1) is true, it is not clear how you would distinguish good from enjoyable. It would actually make a lot of sense if good and enjoyable is the same thing. If 2) is true, good is clearly different from enjoyable even if they happen to match, but the question is now about those authorities - how do they distinguish good from enjoyable? |
||||
|
||||
|
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 9877 Location: Virginia |
|
|||
|
@jl07045
Entertaining or enjoyable is intensely personal. It will vary from individual to individual. There is no need to consult authorities you have to decide for yourself. It is usually based on the show as a whole. No break down into components is required. The question of quality I'll leave to others more qualified. I think the whole point of this thread is that while the two are related they are not the same thing. |
||||
|
||||
|
jl07045
Posts: 1527 Location: Riga, Latvia |
|
|||
|
But Key did break it down to components even if the final judgement is about the work as a whole. In fact, how much each component contributes to the final evaluation is another strike against objectivity in art criticism - everyone has their own preferences about what they value more in art.
As to the point of the thread, it would be rather uninteresting without challenging the idea that they're not the same. |
||||
|
||||
|
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 9877 Location: Virginia |
|
|||
|
Of course Key broke things down into components. He is a reviewer, that is what they do. If you want to review an anime you have to speak as to quality. Since the individual components that make up a show are not necessarily of equal quality they have to be considered separately. Whether such evaluations are objective or subjective is not at issue here.
Entertainment is on the other hand a simple question. Did you, as an individual, enjoy the show. If yes, you found it entertaining, if no, then it isn't. My answer may be different without either of us being wrong. All of the components that make up and anime may be done superbly, but if I don't like the story or am put off by the art style then it is not entertaining to me. That doesn't make it a bad story or make the art bad. The fact that quality and entertainment can be substantially different is what makes them different things. |
||||
|
||||
|
jl07045
Posts: 1527 Location: Riga, Latvia |
|
|||
So what makes something have a bad story or bad art? This is the same thing I asked in the first comment. The question is, is it something more than a lot of people, or some people with informed opinions, think as not enjoyable. Let's say I scribble a human figure on a paper using four lines and four circles. You would probably call the art bad, most people likely would. Why is that? Last edited by jl07045 on Sun Apr 26, 2015 12:50 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
Touma
 Posts: 2651 Location: Colorado, USA |
|
|||
In my opinion the only reasonable standard for judging entertainment is by how entertaining it is. The more entertaining it is the higher quality it has. The less entertaining it is the lower the quality. If entertainment and quality are different then you must be judging anime as something other than, or perhaps more than, entertainment. I see nothing wrong with that approach. We all have our own reasons for watching. But if anime is not just entertainment then what else is it to you?
For me it would be failure to entertain me. |
||||
|
||||
|
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 9877 Location: Virginia |
|
|||
|
jl07045 wrote:
You are asking the wrong person. I am not one of those people who cares to analyze why I do or do not like a given show. Fortunately I'm not a reviewer or a film critic so I don't have to. Your second paragraph reduces any discussion to an absurdity. Even the worst of anime is so far beyond stick figures as make that an inappropriate basis for discussion. Touma wrote:
Sorry, this is where we have to differ. How entertaining a show is forms the basis of how I judge anime, but it is hardly the only reasonable basis. The film critic or reviewer way of judging film including anime is perfectly valid and reasonable. I would go so far as to say it was required in order to have a discussion of a show's worth. I am perfectly willing to concede that there are shows I don't like that are not only good but masterpieces. I am also willing to concede that just because I like a show doesn't make it a piece of art for the ages. However any judgments I make apply to me only. Your mileage may differ. The critical or analytic approach to anime serves a very useful purpose, it is just not for me. |
||||
|
||||
|
jl07045
Posts: 1527 Location: Riga, Latvia |
|
|||
The discussion I want to have is about the difference between enjoying something and calling it good. So naturally the question to ask is "what is 'good' and what is not". I specifically made such a simple example, so that it would be simpler to answer, because it's unlikely that anyone would call stick figures good art for a creative work unless there's a specific reason to use them. If you think you know where I'm going with this and can present a better example, by all means, do that instead of being dismissive. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group