I Don't Understand Why Critics Exist

[Steve 290]

as the title goes, i dont get it, (i know everyones a critic, but im talking about those famous critics that can "decide the fate" of whatever its judging) i mean sure its great to get a review on something you want but i think it should be based on customers or whatever, not just one person, another thing i dont get is how they decide what is good or bad? do they have a special school they go to to tell them how to judge something? and what if the critic is a just a douche and gives a thing a bad review anyways? and who decides who judges anything anyways?

 

share your thoughts

[Doctor XFizzle 8,669]

With the advent of the internet and technology, it's like the cache and role of critics have diminished because people now have access to consumer reports and the general public can provide their opinions on a product/movie/etc. I'd much rather trust the majority of public opinion of general schmoes like me than a stuffy journalist/critic

[Bronium 512]

I'm not sure how many big critics out there, but you have to be stupid to buy something based on one person and one person only. No matter how similar one's taste is, you are bound to have differences and those differences could make or break a product. 

[One 498]

ARGH! CAPITALIZE "I"!!!

 

Anyways:

 

This:

With the advent of the internet and technology, it's like the cache and role of critics have diminished because people now have access to consumer reports and the general public can provide their opinions on a product/movie/etc. I'd much rather trust the majority of public opinion of general schmoes like me than a stuffy journalist/critic

And this:

I'm not sure how many big critics out there, but you have to be stupid to buy something based on one person and one person only. No matter how similar one's taste is, you are bound to have differences and those differences could make or break a product. 

In short, because of technology it is easier for more people to voice their opinion on products giving you a better feel for what it is all about (like if it breaks easily or if it has a compelling story) and you should never base your opinion on someone else's, you should do what you want and don't let what others say hold you back.

[Party Cannon 876]

With the advent of the internet and technology, it's like the cache and role of critics have diminished because people now have access to consumer reports and the general public can provide their opinions on a product/movie/etc. I'd much rather trust the majority of public opinion of general schmoes like me than a stuffy journalist/critic

 

Exactly. This is the information age we live in. Before, critics were the only one's who studied/had access to detailed information on whatever they were a "critic" of.

 

Either way, I do not like professional critics. It is like a carry over of aristocracy and such. To me, if you can't do anything, don't critique those who do. Opinions sure, but it is ridiculous to have someone pay you for it.

[Jammo 986]

I need enternment critics to know how I should think.

Nah, I'm joking. I got someone mad at me when I praised Batman & Robin for capturing the cornball 60s style Batman even at the expense of the story's integrity, simply because of the Nostalgia Critics review. Like he's made it illegal to have an unbiased view of that movie. I never said it was good movie but I rationalized why it has a certain appeal to me. Can't disagree with a popular critic. He's famous and we're not.

Edited December 9, 2012 by Jammo

[Jghx5 33]

I like critics.  The job may seem stupid but people like a second opinion about what they see, read, or play.  Sometime we agree like I agreed with the review critics made with Far Cry 3 and sometimes I don't like with Spider man 3 (sue me I liked it BUT not at much as the first 2).  I just take a review and see if its worth buying or see at full or half price.  Also with critics my fravorite show "The Critic" wouldn't have been made without that job.

 

 

enjoy the clip!

Edited December 9, 2012 by Jghx5

[khaine21x3 789]

They exist for our entertainment.

 

I never trust the critics but I love to read their articles or watch their youtube videos if they're funny.

[Champion RD92 8,658]

I don't normally care what critics think, but if they make really good objective reviews then I will take what they say into consideration.

[Circadian 1,273]

So I know what games to buy day one and what movies to see opening weekend. They play/watch the junk so I don't have to. It saves a lot of time and money. Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are generally what I use.

[Twixie Shores 2]

As was previously mentioned, professional critics used to serve a very important purpose. Prior to social networking, you had to see what a critic wrote about a book, tv show or movie in order to figure out if it's worth watching or reading. Basically, as far as getting a spot goes, you would usually have to write a positive review so that the product would promote your name while you promoted it (that's how even the worst products can get 4+ out of 5 star reviews.

 

As far as electronics go, the process is slightly different. Most of these people work for a tech blog or magazine and know exactly what to look for. And because these people have media outlets, companies will usually send them products to test for free. 

[khaine21x3 789]

So I know what games to buy day one and what movies to see opening weekend. They play/watch the junk so I don't have to. It saves a lot of time and money. Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are generally what I use.

 

You actually trust those guys? @_@

 

I think that metacritic is the absolutely worst and I'd rather trust the gaming forums and fan sites.

[Circadian 1,273]

You actually trust those guys? @_@ I think that metacritic is the absolutely worst and I'd rather trust the gaming forums and fan sites.

 

Metacritic has yet to let me down. My primary sources of gaming information are IGN and Game Informer. I take my info with a grain of salt though.

[DusK 1,264]

Criticism from people that actually know what they're talking about is invaluable. I would not be able to make the music I do today without the constructive criticism I got from the OC ReMix community.

[Dusty Soul 2,611]

Critics are always going to be there, the thing people don't understand is that you don't base it solely on  one person, and if they do, it's thier fault.

Edited December 9, 2012 by Dusty Soul

[Evilshy 5,090]

To me, if you can't do anything, don't critique those who do. Opinions sure, but it is ridiculous to have someone pay you for it.

I've always hated this argument. Just because I've never made a movie means I'm not allowed to point out the flaws in one? That just doesn't make sense, I've seen enough movies with enough people to know what makes a good movie and what doesn't. The process of making one doesn't really factor in all that much.

 

 

Metacritic has yet to let me down. My primary sources of gaming information are IGN and Game Informer. I take my info with a grain of salt though.

Oh dear Lord... God help you, brother

[Party Cannon 876]

I've always hated this argument. Just because I've never made a movie means I'm not allowed to point out the flaws in one? That just doesn't make sense, I've seen enough movies with enough people to know what makes a good movie and what doesn't. The process of making one doesn't really factor in all that much.

 

 

 

Oh dear Lord... God help you, brother

 

It appears you did not read my second sentence. This is to me more a question of employment, being paid to do it, not the act itself.

Edited December 9, 2012 by Party Cannon

[khaine21x3 789]

I personally like Angry Video game nerd and Totalbiscuit on youtube because they're entertaining to watch, I never actually take their reviews seriously.

 

Restaurant critics are nothing more than unethical propagandist who gives good ratings to the restaurants who paid them the most.

 

I criticize propaganda pieces because most modern propaganda are a crime against the art of propaganda and nobody takes them seriously due to how poorly they're done.

[Shanks 10,816]

There have been more cases where a critic has dismissed something as garbage that I liked and where they praised something as the best thing since the wheel was invented when it was total crap than I could possibly count. It is kind of hard to take someone seriously when they are just speaking in lockstep with all their other "peers" luckily with the internet though there are a few more voices which I actually trust far more than the "professionals" though even more credible voices are not the be all end all for me as I prefer to make up my own mind.

[Wubsie 1,123]

 not just one person

This,"one person" is  most of the time a professional who's job it is to give legitimate criticism to something.

Sure it's ok to have customers opinions but I sometimes prefer if one person just review something him/herself professionally.

Expert criticism is ALWAYS needed. Especially when it comes to games, movies, ratings, etc etc...

Not trying to be mean or anything but it's just my opinion.

 But the majority of the time I do like customer criticism as well.

Edited December 10, 2012 by Chalk The Chao

[Squid 100]

Criticism can be a good thing.
I hate being criticized, I really do. It bothers me, makes me sad, especially when I thought it was pretty nice or I spent a lot of time on stuff. In my stop-motion animations, I have been criticized for problems in the films by fellow animators and others on the internet.

 

So, you're probably wondering why I think this is a good thing, don't you?

 

Through that criticism, I know what it is that I need to improve upon in my next film, and thus my art is better. I believe the fear of being criticized drives me to be better, though it's bothersome.

 

More recently, I am criticized less, as I've become one of the better animators in my community.

Now, there is bad criticism.

Some people go out intentionally seeking problems with stuff and going on gigantic rants about it.

There's this bloke on another forum who does that quite often. While other people are talking about how much they like something, he comes in and complains about everything, for example Doctor Who. I don't understand how he goes on these sorts of giant rants and yet he still watches the show, just so he can go off and rant about it. Except he skips the Christmas specials, because he doesn't want his Christmas to be ruined.

Over analyzing things and trying to make it sound as awful as possible just maddens me, and it really spoils the fun. Though I like occasional pointing out of small but amusing plot-holes for fun. I few small ones don't ruin a film. Even some of the best have them.

Oh, dear, I just ranted and criticized how much I hate ranting critics...

 

No matter what anyone else says, I enjoy and love all six Star Wars films. They're all wonderful (5 is best though), and I don't see what's wrong with them nor why I should ever not like them.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

It depends, I like ones like the people on That Guy With the Glasses that just review crappy stuff for the entertainment value, it's fun to to vent negativity and complaints in a constructive way. 

[Titan Rising 2,156]

Critics exist so haters have someone to flock to when they hate stuff for stupid reasons or want to feel better about their own opinions and lack of talent.  All critics do is spout their opinion at people to try to get attention, they don't give any valuable advice - if they did they wouldn't be critics, they would be teachers

 

And that is why you should stay away from critics and never listen to them

Edited December 10, 2012 by Hollowshield

[FlareChaser0096 142]

Critics (and people in general, like politicians) think that they're superior and/or uber important and like shoving their views down peoples' throats as well as in their faces. They exist because our individualistic society and "the whole world revolves around moi" attitude. My 2 bits. 

[TailsIsNotAlone 3,695]

The importance and influence of critics has diminished in the Internet Age, yes. But for those of us who are loners or not riding the current wave of social networking (I have no smartphone, Facebook or Twitter), like me, they still serve a purpose. I won't believe just any critic, though. It has to be one who's intelligent and not just educated, who seeks the same things from films that I do (good acting, intriguing story, a statement), and can do epic, venomous takedowns of films they think are lousy. That's the most fun thing about reading the critics' reviews, and it never gets old for me.

 

So far I've found a few movie critics, especially Ken Hanke of the Mountain Xpress, whom I respect on these grounds.