Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Spehss _]

He wasn't saying it's appealing. He said that if you find that description appealing, watch it. If you don't find it appealing, don't watch it.

Yeah that.

[UXLZ]

I was responding to Bauglir. In fact, saying pretty much what you were, just in a different way.

[Bauglir]

Aye, I was being silly and rather rude. It doesn't appeal to me, but not everything does or should.

[Neonivek]

I am thinking of watching that incredibly bad and boring male pop idol show again.

Not because I want to watch a bad show...

But because it is probably the most interesting, albeit unintentionally, anime I've seen in a bit.

Heck I'd love to do a episode by episode review just to show what I mean.

[Andres]

Do it then. Review away.

[UXLZ]

... Do you mean AKB49?

[Neonivek]

... Do you mean AKB49?

Probably

The anime that is about identity, the cost of fame, and the fakeness of it all...

Except... It flat out isn't.

It is like the anime is a ghost car and had a head on collision with those themes and ghosted through.

[Furtuka]

I'm pretty sure Neo's more likely talking about Uta no Prince-sama. AKB49 doesn't have an anime and AKB0048 is something completely different from what's described here.

[Neonivek]

I'm pretty sure Neo's more likely talking about Uta no Prince-sama. AKB49 doesn't have an anime and AKB0048 is something completely different from what's described here.

No not that... then not AKB49

It is something like... Something something for 49 or 48 or 50...

Because no Uta No Prince-Sama is just surprisingly passable in the first season (low end of good) and terrible in the second... and probably even worse in the third.

It isn't really all that interesting.

[Frumple]

Just... just to check, but. You don't know the name of what you've been watching/talking about?

Wouldn't... wouldn't it be difficult to do a review if you don't know the title?

I mean. I guess it's not necessary?

but it would help

[Neonivek]

Ok now I remember!

Shounen Hollywood.

The anime I originally started watching because I thought it would be a hilarious anime about a bunch of stereotypical shounen characters who are actors in Hollywood.

But it turned out to be a boyband anime.

[Hawkfrost]

To each their own. I think the sport culture of America is appalling, an opinion not shared by every person. 'Objectively bad' cannot exist.

Objectively bad can exist, it's just that people can have bad tastes as well.
If something fails to be what it attempts to do, such as a jigsaw puzzle with edges that don't ever match up with each other, then that's an objectively bad jigsaw puzzle; just because someone might like it anyway doesn't mean that it's good.

For example: Mars of Destruction is an objectively bad anime, because it doesn't even make sense in the context of itself, barely has a plot, possesses completely empty characters, and nothing of any importance happens before it suddenly ends on a cliched "twist". Something is good when it takes a special level of caliber beyond the abilities of a common person to achieve, with clarity, complexity, and/or creativity.

In my opinion, at least.

[Reelya]

I'm a bit iffy on the idea that quality is completely subjective too.

Are expensive italian suits objectively better quality than clothes you buy at K-Mart? A lot of people prefer the K-Mart clothes, so I guess there's no objectively better or worse brands of clothing. For footwear, Crocs must be just as high-quality as Doc Martens, because many people prefer Crocs. If we go down the subjective quality route, then a kid tinking on a toy piano is just as good as a Beethoven symphony played by an ochestra, and your kids crayon drawing you stick on the fridge is the equal of the best rennaisance painters. Also a brick outhouse toilet is the equal of the Sistene Chapel.

I'd guess that quality (good vs bad) is actually a perpendicular axis to whether anyone likes a specific thing (enjoyable vs unenjoyable). Some people like eating dirt. That doesn't make dirt the same quality as french cuisine. French vs Italian is a fair debate, both are high quality. French vs McDonalds vs Dirt isn't a fair debate. The McDonalds and Dirt are not high quality no matter how many people like them.

[Hawkfrost]

I think there also needs to be considered the axis of niche.

When something is good, not liking it often comes down to a matter of personal taste instead of being indicative of quality.

For example, if something is mainstream and bad, people will hate it. If something is niche and bad, people will hate it. If something is mainstream and good, people will like it. If something is niche and good, a fair deal of people will still think it is bad.
The hard part comes from being able to separate the niche from the bad, and figure if your complaints with something are objective or subjective, i.e., a question of quality or taste.


I may not be a huge fan of Steins;Gate but I'm not going to go rage at people for liking it, because when I stop to break down the elements of the show I can see that it contains some really good things.
On the counter side, I thought that Mononoke was fantastic but I'm not going to have expectations that any other person would enjoy it as well, because the only people it would appeal to would be others who were looking for the exact same thing; a weird show about monsters and the evil that humanity creates for itself due to it's own selfish actions.

Steins;Gate is popular because it is mainstream and good, and Mononoke is unpopular because it is good and niche.
Being popular does not mean something is good, but being unpopular does not mean a thing is necessarily bad, either.

[Bauglir]

Look, if we want to talk about being good at something that's certainly a topic we can have objective discussions about, but if we're just discussing "goodness" in a vacuum I don't think we have adequate context to make universal declarations.