Fame and Misfortune has a bad moral.

[Thrond 3,263]

1 hour ago, Jeric said:

Quite a bit of the critics in this fandom are rather ... amateurish. Not saying you are, however far too many posture thenselves as some form of pseudo authority. TV Tropes does not an expert make. Again, it's just a general opinion, no more objective than the next. My eight year old neice has as much credibility as most of the critics who try and pedestal themselves. 

And yes, I did intend that to sound elitist and I certainly am hoping it is taken that way. 

A lot of people critiquing My Little Pony are hobbyists, which means they critique this show because they care about it enough to put thought into it. Considering that, I hope you can understand how an episode where characters spend a significant amount of time getting upset about common criticisms of the show could be a little alienating, to say the least. 

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

This episode was just making fun of the fans.

[Thrond 3,263]

10 minutes ago, Jeric said:

Wr agree here, mostly. It's the tone of the reviewer and their style of writing that I take issue with, not their final conclusion. 

I wasn't trying to disprove anything so that particular fallacy wouldn't apply. Amusingly enough, my point was that the pseudo intellectual types who don't know the proper application of the terms they use did deserve to be taken down a peg. I approach the episode as mostly addressing them, not the general audience who may not feel a particular episode lands. The misuse of terms, along with how a reviewer carries themselves, does say something about someone's psychologocal profile. In this very thread we have seen simple statements that a reviewer had an opinion that they agree with, leaving the implication of authority. If people are going to assign weight to another's view as an authority, they should be aware of the technical flaws of these reviews. Terms like Mary Sue, DeM, and even pacing are often misunderstood. Often, when I ask a reviewer of great renown to name a piece of media that effectively utilizes shifting pacing to the benefit of the audience, I am greated with the deafening sound of crickets.  

For what it is worth, there are plenty of episodes that I dislike, and often fight back on the other side of the equation that seemingly takes any less than favorable opinion as a statement that they the individual that enjoys the episode is somehow incorrect. We have seen this very phenomenon in this thread as well. I have disdain for both approaches, and while I will not dismiss that a person dislikes or likes something, I will marginalize their professed authority. 

I also have to say ... the greatest personal sin any entertainment can make (for me), is to bore me. 

I haven't watched this episode lately, because I actually do find it rather tedious - most of the jokes don't land for me - but from what I recall, some sort of presumed takedown of a shoddily-constructed sense of authority isn't really what I took from it, and even then I don't feel the friendship diary is a particularly effective allegory for a work of art/entertainment media. Otherwise, I agree with what you've said here. 

[Jeric 46,851]

1 hour ago, AlexanderThrond said:

A lot of people critiquing My Little Pony are hobbyists, which means they critique this show because they care about it enough to put thought into it. Considering that, I hope you can understand how an episode where characters spend a significant amount of time getting upset about common criticisms of the show could be a little alienating, to say the least. 

I absolutely get that. Again, my comments aren't directed to you or DQ. Both of you have, on more than one occasion, acknowledged that you have no issue when someone likes an episode you don't. You in particular have been very specific about your personal preferences and why you like specific themes and interactions -- basically what draws you to the show in the first place. When an episode misses that for you, it makes sense. We share a similar affinity for smaller intimate and light-hearted stories over the grander episodes (though I admit to enjoying some of the finale nonetheless). 

 

1 hour ago, AlexanderThrond said:

I haven't watched this episode lately, because I actually do find it rather tedious - most of the jokes don't land for me - but from what I recall, some sort of presumed takedown of a shoddily-constructed sense of authority isn't really what I took from it, and even then I don't feel the friendship diary is a particularly effective allegory for a work of art/entertainment media. Otherwise, I agree with what you've said here. 

A few of the comments of the pony based fans were lifted from directed Twitter interactions between fans and show staff. One line of dialog a character says in the crowd is a personal pet peeve of Jim Miller. So it was inspired, in part, specifically by the fans who take a position of entitlement and expectation of influencing the creative direction of the show staff through negative criticism with phrasing such as "you owe it to us to have x shown in this show". 

[Thrond 3,263]

1 hour ago, Jeric said:

A few of the comments of the pony based fans were lifted from directed Twitter interactions between fans and show staff. One line of dialog a character says in the crowd is a personal pet peeve of Jim Miller. So it was inspired, in part, specifically by the fans who take a position of entitlement and expectation of influencing the creative direction of the show staff through negative criticism with phrasing such as "you owe it to us to have x shown in this show". 

Hmm, maybe I would have appreciated this episode more if these themes were represented in a different way. I think the whole friendship diary thing is something I get hung up on. 

[Will Guide 21,360]

1 hour ago, Jeric said:

One line of dialog a character says in the crowd is a personal pet peeve of Jim Miller. 

Out of curiosity, was the line "Twilight was better before she got wings?" Because where were you getting that bit of info? 

[Nyactis Mewcis Catlum 672]

3 hours ago, Jeric said:

Wr agree here, mostly. It's the tone of the reviewer and their style of writing that I take issue with, not their final conclusion. 

Fair enough.

3 hours ago, Jeric said:

I wasn't trying to disprove anything so that particular fallacy wouldn't apply.

In that case, my mistake. It came across to me like you were suggesting that a poorly argued point of view is incorrect because it's poorly argued. I will admit I must have misread.

3 hours ago, Jeric said:

Amusingly enough, my point was that the pseudo intellectual types who don't know the proper application of the terms they use did deserve to be taken down a peg. I approach the episode as mostly addressing them, not the general audience who may not feel a particular episode lands. The misuse of terms, along with how a reviewer carries themselves, does say something about someone's psychologocal profile. In this very thread we have seen simple statements that a reviewer had an opinion that they agree with, leaving the implication of authority. If people are going to assign weight to another's view as an authority, they should be aware of the technical flaws of these reviews. Terms like Mary Sue, DeM, and even pacing are often misunderstood.

To this effect, I do actually agree. Using terms incorrectly is to the detriment of any good reviewer. I especially sympathize with the "Mary Sue" part, as I think that term is thrown not at characters that actually deserve it but rather fully realized characters who have grown over a narrative (if you think I'm targeting a specific example here, you're probably right).

"Pacing" was never a term I ever got because no one explains exactly what's wrong with the pacing, which is why I rarely use it when I'm criticizing media other than to suggest that the "story flow simply feels...off", admitting that it's not an objective point of view but rather just that something doesn't feel right about it. I'm sure if I sat down and actually dissected the episode as well as compared it to an episode that feels like it has "correct" story flow I could figure it out, but I'm figuring most reviewers aren't going to take the time to do that.

The problem is that I don't think the episode mocks those who use incorrect terminology at all. Instead, it broadly sweeps a category of complaints without considering any of the backing behind those complaints. Not everyone who dislikes Twilicorn dislikes it for the same reason. It's laughable when people argue that it throws off the balance of two unicorns, two earth ponies, and two pegasi as that's superficial, but there are other concerns that some arguers against Twilicorn brought up that are left unaddressed, and yet they're unfairly lumped with that, and I think we can agree the arguments just aren't equivalent.

In other words, it's not addressing the crux of any of the arguments.

I should also note that the point that Fluttershy uses to defend herself is something I've heard verbatim from fans as well. 

3 hours ago, Jeric said:

Often, when I ask a reviewer of great renown to name a piece of media that effectively utilizes shifting pacing to the benefit of the audience, I am greated with the deafening sound of crickets.  

To be fair, it might just be because that reviewer doesn't respond to comments often in general. I remember Mr Enter in particular I gave a comment a while ago critiquing one of his reviews, and he never replied to me then, either. (Don't ask me what I was critiquing, it was well over a year ago so I've forgotten now lol) It's clear, though, that he reads criticisms, as he cites as much in his later videos.

3 hours ago, Jeric said:

For what it is worth, there are plenty of episodes that I dislike, and often fight back on the other side of the equation that seemingly takes any less than favorable opinion as a statement that they the individual that enjoys the episode is somehow incorrect. We have seen this very phenomenon in this thread as well. I have disdain for both approaches, and while I will not dismiss that a person dislikes or likes something, I will marginalize their professed authority. 

I'm afraid I'm having trouble parsing the first sentence in this which is making the following sentences make no sense to me. Can you rephrase? Sorry.

If I was to take a stab at it, you're saying that no one person can suggest that they're an authority on an episode, which I agree with.

3 hours ago, Jeric said:

I also have to say ... the greatest personal sin any entertainment can make (for me), is to bore me. 

For sure. I will give Fame & Misfortune that credit: if nothing else, it's not boring. It's a discussion starter. For that reason alone, I'm glad it exists.

[Dark Qiviut 22,396]

18 minutes ago, AlexanderThrond said:

I think the whole friendship diary thing is something I get hung up on. 

Mr. Enter did, too, and explained why in the video. The journal is autobriographic, so the audience is going to read what they experienced, the facts about their adventures, and what they learned from them. But folks like Starlight and Twilight complained how those "critics" don't get the "right" interpretation of the facts. Unfortunately, that part of the premise falls apart for one key reason: In fiction, people will get different experiences and interpretations of what they read and watch. An autobiography doesn't behave that way, but a nonfictional book is used as a vessel to how to watch fiction. The two types of content are completely incompatible to one another.

[Singe 2,111]

One of the things that authors can forget in their work is that they can create unforeseen expectations in characters that hits like a brick wall. Fluttershy is good example because there are created expectations in the minds of the readers to think if you can befriend the Lord of Chaos, being assertive should be a cake walk. She has done a lot of other things that very much creates the expectation of being assertive should be a cake walk by now.

Edited March 11, 2018 by Singe

[Hierok 11,831]

5 hours ago, BronyNumber42licious said:

This episode was just making fun of the fans.

And that is what makes it great. Many people here are offended about this, but they really shouldn't. 

[Jeric 46,851]

7 hours ago, WiiGuy2014 said:

Out of curiosity, was the line "Twilight was better before she got wings?" Because where were you getting that bit of info? 

"We want answers"

"Yeah we're entitled to know"

[Thrond 3,263]

19 hours ago, Singe said:

One of the things that authors can forget in their work is that they can create unforeseen expectations in characters that hits like a brick wall. Fluttershy is good example because there are created expectations in the minds of the readers to think if you can befriend the Lord of Chaos, being assertive should be a cake walk. She has done a lot of other things that very much creates the expectation of being assertive should be a cake walk by now.

A bit of a tangent, but with Fluttershy it was more that I felt her episodes were too similar to each other. 

[YoshiAngemon 223]

I've seen the episode once, but it seems like a better moral is that it would've been better to not share it with the world, lest you face the criticisms of the fans. The episode itself is great, and as SaburoDaimando himself said in his review of the episode, it was reminiscent of the Animaniacs segment "Please, Please, PLEASE Get a Life Foundation!" An easy way out would be for Celestia to come in and pull off a Memory Wipe in the wake of it all, making it reminiscent of the Super Mario World episode "Party Line," with the Cave People forgetting about the phone system, and Yoshi eating the vines.

But then, those are two different things entirely, and should be disregarded!

[Azureth 687]

So what does everyone think about the song:

 

And is it just me do most the citizens of Ponyville suffer from some serious bipolar disorder? Depending on the episode they go from loving the M6 (especially gushing over Princess Twilight) to hating them.

[Nyactis Mewcis Catlum 672]

I personally actually liked the song, despite not liking the moral. It's one of those that sounds great and only really looks bad upon further examination for me.

41 minutes ago, Azureth said:

And is it just me do most the citizens of Ponyville suffer from some serious bipolar disorder? Depending on the episode they go from loving the M6 (especially gushing over Princess Twilight) to hating them.

Forgive me for sounding a bit pedantic here, but that behavior actually more closely resembles borderline personality disorder, not bipolar disorder.

[Singe 2,111]

On 3/11/2018 at 11:25 PM, YoshiAngemon said:

I've seen the episode once, but it seems like a better moral is that it would've been better to not share it with the world, lest you face the criticisms of the fans. The episode itself is great, and as SaburoDaimando himself said in his review of the episode, it was reminiscent of the Animaniacs segment "Please, Please, PLEASE Get a Life Foundation!" An easy way out would be for Celestia to come in and pull off a Memory Wipe in the wake of it all, making it reminiscent of the Super Mario World episode "Party Line," with the Cave People forgetting about the phone system, and Yoshi eating the vines.

But then, those are two different things entirely, and should be disregarded!

Ah, yes the nightmare of Ponyville Confidential. The trauma of that event should have put them on the side of caution before throwing their raw book out into the world.

[Will Guide 21,360]

On 3/13/2018 at 6:32 PM, Azureth said:

So what does everyone think about the song:

 

And is it just me do most the citizens of Ponyville suffer from some serious bipolar disorder? Depending on the episode they go from loving the M6 (especially gushing over Princess Twilight) to hating them.

@Scootaloved

The background ponies are called incidental ponies in the script. They are supposed to have their attitudes and characters changed to help reflect how the world is full of good ponies and bad ponies. It's similar to how the same actor can play heroes and villains depending on what plot is about. And this just happens to be one of the episode where the incidental ponies represent the unpleasable fanbase.

Edited March 16, 2018 by WiiGuy2014

[Nyactis Mewcis Catlum 672]

1 hour ago, WiiGuy2014 said:

@Scootaloved

The background ponies are called incidental ponies in the script. They are supposed to have their attitudes and characters changed to help reflect how the world is full of good ponies and bad ponies. It's similar to how the same actor can play heroes and villains depending on what plot is about. And this just happens to be one of the episode where the incidental ponies represent the unpleasable fanbase.

Perhaps one should look at the fact that the fanbase is "unpleasable" because all of the negative opinions are being lumped together as being associated with each other, when in actuality there are different people with different opinions everywhere. For instance, not everyone who didn't like Twilicorn had a problem with Fluttershy's episodes feeling same-y, and vice versa. The problem is that the fanbase is being treated as a monolith, rather than a diversity of ideas.

It's not that everyone wants a reason to complain, it's that different people complain about different things, and that's inherent in human nature. What bothers you may not bother me, and vice versa.

That isn't to say there aren't critics who are overly negative and complain about everything in the show, but they're hardly representative of the fanbase as a whole, and making out like they are holds them up to a pedestal - which I'm sure is not the intention of the writers nor the people commenting here. Their opinion should hold no more weight than anyone else's, and yet they're being given special attention in the show itself and on the forums. Such complaints would not hold such weight if people just... Didn't give them attention. Critics who are overly negative and make a living off of that live and die off their audience. It is much more productive to criticize them directly, or to simply not give them your attention at all, than it is to put a spotlight on them. Psst: The spotlight is usually what those negative critics WANT because it makes them more money and draws more people to their channels.

Even without that considered, the "incidental ponies" concept does not sound like a good concept from a writing perspective. It's probably done to push a moral, but for anyone who's watching the show through, the inconsistency will be obvious and a common complaint of the show... And whaddaya know, it is a common one for those who don't like the episode. You can use characters as mouthpieces for ideas, but it's better to introduce new characters for that rather than use the ponies in Ponyville; it's way too glaring that these ponies would have known the Mane 6 very well by this point and thus their criticisms come off as extremely odd and out of place. I don't want to use "out of character" because that is commonly used as a way to dismiss a character's behavior in certain situations when it hasn't been demonstrated how they would react in this situation, but I can at the very least say it's jarring when the ponies of Ponyville treat Pinkie Pie, the pony we know from the very first episode of the show personally gets to know every pony in Ponyville, like she's a stranger to be laughed at.

[EpicEnergy 23,218]

It depends on how you look at it, because I see it as a way of saying that characters are flawed and that this should be acceptable.