Do we need critics? - General

This has been bugging me recently and i'd like to bring it up. In the case of personal taste, how much should anyone be prepared to accept a critics review? After all, one can't expect them to speak for oneself or hold ones' values when the critic passes comment on say, a piece of art, or a film. Can one not form their own opinion, or are they somehow less qualified than the critic? How much should one let a critic (or critics) opinion(s) sway them? Remember 'critic' is an umbrella term, so don't limit any views you express to include just those who judge merit professionally - if I told you why I thought Half-Life 2 was a rubbish game and justified my position, that would make me a critic, albeit an unpopular one.

If we didn't have critics, every form of art, including movies, would be shit. Without someone to tell you something is bad and to stop doing it, you would never improve.

-snip- wrong thread [editline][[/editline] [QUOTE=ffffff-]Can one not form their own opinion, or are they somehow less qualified than the critic? How much should one let a critic (or critics) opinion(s) sway them?[/QUOTE] I'm most interested in an answer to this.

Critics are good providing that they have enough common sense or expertise in their field to be one. They're like reviews but highlight and analyse the negative points of something, but they should only have some influence. If you want to watch a movie which looks really good, you should do it anyway, even if some critic doesn't like it; everyone has different tastes.

[QUOTE=ffffff-;33538804] I'm most interested in an answer to this.[/QUOTE]If what you create is not for you but for the public, your opinion means very little. "STFU, I like it" is a bad excuse for creating bad things. If you're talking about influencing consumer's opinion, then what you're looking for is a reviewer, not a critic really.

We don't need them. We don't need a lot of things;We don't need toilet paper, but it helps. Critics help. You should never take a critics word as fact, they are there to help you make decisions about things, but not there to make a decision for you. The only difference between a professional critic and a non professional critic is that one gets paid. If you have the mental capacity to form an opinion, then you are indeed a critic.

well what do you mean by critic? In literature critics don't just say 'I like/don't like this' they analyse the text and draw conclusions, which are important to the literary canon as a whole.

I usually read reviews just to hear about the movie. I don't pay attention to the actual critic opinion unless it's from a friend or somebody I know

[QUOTE=strayebyrd;33540004]well what do you mean by critic? In literature critics don't just say 'I like/don't like this' they analyse the text and draw conclusions, which are important to the literary canon as a whole.[/QUOTE]Umm the "I like/don't" is not a critic so the only option left is the second one.

[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33540041]Umm the "I like/don't" is not a critic so the only option left is the second one.[/QUOTE] no but what I mean is literary criticism isn't the same sort of thing as criticism in any other area, it's often about the close textual analysis of a piece, specifically in regards to it's impact on areas such as psychology, feminism, politics, or anything really. Whereas a film critic will often write a piece on how good a film is, literary criticism usually strays away from commenting on the actual piece's quality and focuses on other things

Literary criticism isn't just evaluation though, literary critics cover a far broader base than that, including interpretation.

[QUOTE=Lazor;33540105]Literary criticism isn't just evaluation though, literary critics cover a far broader base than that, including interpretation.[/QUOTE] that's my point.

strayebyrd said it better. though i'd say not all film criticism is like you described [editline]2nd December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=strayebyrd;33540113]that's my point.[/QUOTE] i was talking to aceofdivine!!!!!

Do you want to live in a world without the Angry Video Game Nerd or Zero Punctuation?

Yes, just because peoples opinions might vary as to whether they like it or not, it is still useful to have someone to evaluate production quality and story writing.

[QUOTE=Lazor;33540121]strayebyrd said it better. though i'd say not all film criticism is like you described [editline]2nd December 2011[/editline] i was talking to aceofdivine!!!!![/QUOTE] blast! and yeah I agree not all film criticism is like I described, but I guess I'm more referring to the general idea of a film critic

[QUOTE=MIPS;33540130]Do you want to live in a world without the Angry Video Game Nerd or Zero Punctuation?[/QUOTE] i think i could deal with that, yeah [editline]2nd December 2011[/editline] [quote]Can one not form their own opinion, or are they somehow less qualified than the critic? How much should one let a critic (or critics) opinion(s) sway them?[/quote] i'd say a critic is more qualified than you(and some critics are more qualified than others) but that doesn't mean you need to have the same opinion as them.

I'd also like to point out, that a good critic knows how to write a good criticism so that it in itself is a form of art. A good critic is like a journalist and must be able to establish some sort of rapport with his audience and while a review is in the forefront it has to be captivating. We've also had some sort of trendsetting critics since ancient times. Just take a look at Gaius Petronius who was knows as the arbitr elegantiae

Criticism is inherent in art. It's impossible to see a piece of art and not react to it, and we form our opinion of it whether that reaction is good or bad. We're all critics, so yes, we need them.

[QUOTE=JustGman;33538710]If we didn't have critics, every form of art, including movies, would be shit. Without someone to tell you something is bad and to stop doing it, you would never improve.[/QUOTE] I find pretty much all new high budget Hollywood films to be bullshit. So where has this criticizing led the movie industry? Bullshit as in they are all the same in a nutshell. Dialogues, plots and shit are all very much alike or similar, not to mention the filming and the top-notch editing and special effects. I find all that to be bullshit. (Captain America, Megamind, Green Lantern, some newer alien visitor comedy movie..) And then there's a handful of those films (and tv-series) that are just plain damn interesting and exciting and what-not. Those I like and respect. (Fight Club, Memento, notably some of the HBO series, and others)

Some people don't like things but don't know why. Good critics know why they like or dislike something to a fine degree and their tastes reflect the majority opinion. People who want to get better at something also appreciate criticism.

People don't seem to understand the role of critics. Sadly, in fact, many critics make a living without understanding their role. They're not there to ll you if you will enjoy a movie but rather to say how a piece contributes to the whole of the art form.

A good critic should be more focused on what the actual game, book, movie, or film is like by really going in depth on what it's about and providing examples. If the review is well written enough you can tell whether or not you'd want to go check it out regardless of the critic's actual opinion on it. There are times where a negative review of something actually made me want to go check it out.

A credible critic is usually one who can write or speak well about what is good or bad with what they are critiquing, and who have experienced enough of the subject to be able to make comparisons. They are pretty important because they give you a good idea of what is worth your money in comparison to other goods, and also tells you what is worth your time. A credible critic is just someone who is knowledge of that field and is able to give recommendations from their field. Personal preference of course comes into play, but I don't really see that as an issue. It could be if there was only one critic, but that is why it is important to look though the opinion of many critics, professional and amateur.

[QUOTE=Bat-shit;33552193]I find pretty much all new high budget Hollywood films to be bullshit. So where has this criticizing led the movie industry? Bullshit as in they are all the same in a nutshell. Dialogues, plots and shit are all very much alike or similar, not to mention the filming and the top-notch editing and special effects. I find all that to be bullshit. (Captain America, Megamind, Green Lantern, some newer alien visitor comedy movie..) [/QUOTE] I remember that those tend to get under a 50% or 20% for being generic.

[QUOTE=Bat-shit;33552193]I find pretty much all new high budget Hollywood films to be bullshit. So where has this criticizing led the movie industry? Bullshit as in they are all the same in a nutshell. Dialogues, plots and shit are all very much alike or similar, not to mention the filming and the top-notch editing and special effects. I find all that to be bullshit. (Captain America, Megamind, Green Lantern, some newer alien visitor comedy movie..) And then there's a handful of those films (and tv-series) that are just plain damn interesting and exciting and what-not. Those I like and respect. (Fight Club, Memento, notably some of the HBO series, and others)[/QUOTE] well the type of people who like to see action films with everything exploding and comedy films where people fall down and fart don't really pay attention to critics so of course those films make a lot of money and if it keeps making money, it's gonna keep being made.

[QUOTE=pie_is_good;33553081]well the type of people who like to see action films with everything exploding and comedy films where people fall down and fart don't really pay attention to critics so of course those films make a lot of money and if it keeps making money, it's gonna keep being made.[/QUOTE] Yeah true, speaking of action films; Crank is fucking boss even though there isn't a single explosion.

Crank kicks ass.

We don't need critics like gametrailers.com. All they do is call other games shit, call PC gamers and PC's shit, and praise call of duty.

[QUOTE=seano12;33558264]We don't need critics like gametrailers.com. All they do is call other games shit, call PC gamers and PC's shit, and praise call of duty.[/QUOTE] video game criticism isn't very developed. i think it's cuz video games are a relatively new form of art/entertainment. that and the industry sucks.