>"[Critically praised cartoon] is actually terrible, and you have bad taste if you like it!"Why is this board so contrarian? Do you think saying that something that's popular or well-received is bad makes you seem smart or interesting?
>>119152325I bet Bobby got hooked on crack when he grew up
>>119152325>Do you think saying that something that's popular or well-received is bad makes you seem smart or interesting?You must be new here.
>>119152325Welcome to /co/
>>119152325You come to /co/ for the memes, fanart, rumors, and latest news on cartoons. Or to shit on cartoons because there's no other place to shit on them. If you want actual discussion of cartoons stick to youtube commentators and reviewers, even the average novice toontuber is more knowledgeable about what makes a good cartoon than 90% of those of us that dwell here.
>>119152325>Do you think saying that something that's popular or well-received is bad makes you seem smart or interesting?boy wait until you go into /mu/ or /tv/
>>119152325>implying """"critically praised"""" means anything in this day and agelel
>>119156032>/tv/that board is just:"you're a chud!""you're a tranny!"ad nauseam; they don't even get far enough beyond that to begin being contrarian
>>119156190/tv/ is utter dogshit but at least they are aware of how low they reached, so instead of going full insufferable mode they at least have fun with it/mu/ for the other hand...
>>119152344No one gets hooked on crack anymore, anon.Bobby gets hooked on meth or pain pills.
I liked it when it had Green Day and Willie Nelson on it and Tom Petty became a voice actor.
>>119156683/mu/ is nothing but a bunch of zoomers who only listen to kpop and trap and oldfarts who reminisce about the old days when /mu/ "had actual taste" while circlejerking to the same 10 old albums over and over and over again.
>>119152325Apparently it's interesting enough for you to make a thread about it.
>>119152325Instead of speaking in vague generalities that are not provable, why don't you give a specific example to kick off the discussion? Afraid to find out you might have shit taste?
everyone thinks popular means bad
>>119152325I’d like to say to you and other people fuck off about that because not everything critically acclaimed is actually good. In fact critics and general audiences disagree about shit all the time. No one is the be all and end all of ‘it’s good’. You’re appealing to authority or just a general consensus of opinion and both can be wrong.
This is not /v/, OP. Dial it back a couple of notches. To address your point, why the FUCK should we care about what a critic likes and prizes, especially when we can watch the damm thing ourselves?And keep in mind popular is a completely different thing than critically acclaimed.>>119155490>If you want actual discussion of cartoons stick to youtube commentators and reviewers, even the average novice toontuber is more knowledgeable about what makes a good cartoon than 90% of those of us that dwell here.I wouldn't go THAT far. But you're right in that OP is better suited for Youtube comments than here.>>119156044Actually pre release positive reviews is a pretty decent predictor that I won't like it. At least not enough to shell out money for it.
>>119156896Not him but /co/ has a near pathological need to REEEEE about Spiderverse and tell everyone how it wasn't as good as people said it was
>>119158623It is well animated and the jokes land for the most part, but I do not like the movie's message of saying Spider-man is a brand and not a unique character. All the action and jokes in the world cannot fix a bad premise. And as a Peterfag, I am just plain burnt out on the endless Miles push in all the Spider multimedia projects. Peter is a solo hero who does not need a sidekick. Especially not one that gives Bendis royalties.If that makes me a contrarian, then so be it.
>>119152344This isn't the 1980s anymore anon, it would be perkies or zannies
>>119152325In a group of 10 scientists if the first 9 agree then the last one is duty bound to disagree.
>>119152325First, there are many stories/IPs that are so fucking overhyped and insanely regarded that it doesn't matter how good they 'objectively' are. The first Star Wars movies don't deserve the psychotic hype which transformed it into a commercial industry supporting cities of human being's livelihoods because NO FUCKING STORY would deserve that hype, but here we are. Compare this to the bible stories (which are objectively shit boring stories mostly due to redactions and later editing) or the Iliad and Odyssey, or Gilgamesh, or Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Journey to the West, Shakespeare or Don Quixote. 1001 Nights. These stories survive the test of time naturally or through religious/cultural mandate. There were probably many stories lost that were once required to know for citizens of this or that lost empire.But now we have 'free markets' and 'free speech', so we can't really know, for example. If the Beatles 'deserved' the hype (no one really does, that amount of hype is delusional and dangerous - no one could even hear anything during Beatlemania era concerts due to the audience screaming their heads off, hyperventilating and ending up in hospitals) due to their talents or due to the marketing and the commercial response. It's a chicken and egg problem. Is Harry Potter a good story, or did it stimulate a global commercial machine on it's merits or on accident? Why didn't similar children's books do the same thing five years before or ever since? Is it really because Rowling is a genius?You can't really 'trust' what's popular now, it has to pass through the test of time, but even this only transforms stories from 'unimportant' culturally to 'important'. It doesn't say if these stories are good or valuable in any other sense.In general, there is a good reason to doubt if something is good or not and opposing the mindless popular opinion is necessary to see if these overhyped products aren't in fact dangerous or worthless.
>>119152325Harley Quinn is a good example of this
>>119157006>Actually pre release positive reviews is a pretty decent predictor that I won't like itSo if it gets negative reviews that means you'll like it?
>>119152325I have more free time if I decide not to like something without watching it instead of watching it and then deciding not to like it. The problem is I use that free time posting online about how I don't like it.
>y-you just want to seem interestingWhy is this always the cope with retards who can't handle opinions they don't like? No, I just don't like your shit movie/show/whatever. Caring how you perceive me for it never entered my mind and if critics are an authority to you then you may have brain problems.>>119158623Spiderverse is not bad, but I dislike Miles, I believe universe-hopping bullshit doesn't belong in Spider-Man stories and I hate how bland all the villains are. Villains are usually half the appeal for me in capeshit, so if they're bad then I probably won't like your work no matter how acclaimed it is.