How critical are you?

When you watch a movie, read a book, play a game, etc. how critical are you? Do you nitpick every little flaw and refuse to settle for anything less than perfect? Or do you find something to appreciate in everything? I feel like I'm not critical enough. I like 99% of things as long as they have an ounce of effort put into them.

My brain doesn't let me enjoy the movie most of the times. I end up thinking "oh this is the clique I saw in that other movie" or "oh look, from this camera angle they forgot this thing". Or even I end up predicting 90% of the movies straight from the trailers which just reinforces the unsatisfactory feeling the next time I watch a trailer for upcoming movie. However, the upside I would say is that I found much more nuanced and niche movies that aren't even avant garde or artsy but simply more subtle in a way they deliver their story and ideas.

You can be both ways. You can be critical and nitpick inside your hide, pick apart every flaw and still enjoy the rest of the work. With science fiction especially I treat it as a sort of game. When they get something wrong I think "aha! that's not how physics works" and then enjoy the rest of the story. With any type of fiction, there might be bits of story that don't add up but I don't let it ruin it. I wait until the movie is over and then turn to my friends or go online and challenge them to explain these glaring holes, but try to make a joke out of it somehow. People who post angry essays an hour after The Walking Dead or the latest Marvel series airs trying to display their own expertise at firearms or "in universe lore" or whatever else are destined to die bitter and lonely someday.

>>10831 >hide head... HEAD.

>>10831 We'll said

I don't think engaging with a work critically is inherently to its detriment. It's common for me to go on mental tangents over one point or try to connect it to other things (which is why I read a lot more than I watch, it's a pain to have to pause or rewind, and you can't if you have company). Whether in a positive or negative light I think critical thought only enhances an experience.

It depends on exposure. When i'm exposed to the same thing (movies, books, anime, manga, etc.) over and over again i get super sensitive on flaws or lack of quality, sometimes only extremely good works are enjoyable. Obviously avoiding those marathons is the ideal, then i am fairly easy to please if i have at least a remote interest on parts or the full work. Although as age enlarges, pleasure gets a bit harder to attain.

>>10827 I have extremely low standards, as long as it has soul. So, basically like you OP.

>>10827 Only if I'm watching a horror film with other people. Otherwise I'm not really looking for them

I hate myself most of all, I enjoy nothing, and If i make too many comments I can feel how the people in the room begin to be uncomfortable. I tend to point out the bad, the poor direction the obvious inspiration and how wrong the references are, how off the science is, how bad the actor is, how the accent doesn't fit the region, this means I cannot longer enjoy things. Magic the gathering is cool tho. I don't want to be like this. So most of the time I shut up, and only comment on the good things. Its a bad idea to pay attention.

>>10827 I usually try to not be too critical, as I'm mainly looking for a good time. When I watch anime, its usually to like it, not to hate it.

> When you watch a movie, read a book, play a game, etc. how critical are you? It depends on the material. Due to the gatekeepers desire to pull wool over the eyes of the common man, it is necessary for popular media outlets to be controlled. This is how a certain circle of ideas remains secret, even as they transform from a pious hope into future programming and are applied in the darker sciences. As in the old days of suppression of Knowledge and thus Power, today's artists embed forbidden wisdoms in their Great Works. This is apparent in Modern Anime, Film, Music, video games, and even lesser known areas which may reach a wider audience. Often one must "sell one's soul" to gain fame in these areas, and if one does not, one is not promoted by the system, they are filtered out by the gatekeepers. How this is transfer of power achieved is rather dark. However, some soulless ones would still seek to do good by dropping hints and giving commentary on the reality of our situation using the esoteric practice of occulting (hiding) wisdom. Others who rose in prominence without succumbing to the monocultural powers that be come to know what can and can't be presented openly through other means. Some of these also encode esoteric references to hidden truths in their works. Sometimes it only takes a lone composer, editor, cinematographer, background artist, etc. individual in a minor role who is enlightened to the mysteries in order to give a piece of media a deeper layer of meaning beyond the surface level narrative and emotional gimmicks. Even Shakespere's works hold many occulted references to forbidden wisdoms about our world. Still other works are not made with enough love or wisdom or desire to enlighten the seeker. These I tend to pay no attention to. When I recognize certain thematic and situational juxtapositions (in the presence of conformational symbols) which pertain to my own sphere of such "magic", I tend to perk up and take a very deep interest. For therein may be a multi-layered dialog that discusses over hidden and nuanced aspect of wisdom. The artist(s) may be struggling over some aspect of the mysteries which I have yet to deal, or more often, I may have already removed the veil they are struggling with. Sometimes There is magic all around you, but that term doesn't mean what you might first think. Ignore the "Common" sense, group think, and rhetorical gimmicks such as Hanlon's Razer and Occam's razor, for these are parts of a spell meant to kill your curiosity. For, how can one tell what the simplest answer is if one does not have the full picture? Do not criminals often claim innocence through ignorance? Yet both "rational" pseudo intellectuals and disinformation agents will browbeat you with these literally ignorant "common wisdoms". Regurgitating the facts claimed by authority figures does not make one smart. For instance: Compute the speed of alleged "Gravity Waves" from recent observations and you'll see they don't move faster than light as Einstein predicted. In fact, laser light will bend in an EM field, and the timing of Solar Activity correlates more strongly with said observed "waves"... but nerds will not question this. This wisdom and that of true free energy has appeared recently in Darling in the Franxx, along with an esoteric treatise on the biblical garden of eden thought experiment, the forbidden sciences of free energy vs controlling masses through "hydraulic despotism", etc. One who Question's Everything shall eventually come to understand our greater reality, and see that they have never been alone... Any sufficiently researched magic is indistinguishable from science.

I'm not critical. In fact, I see critical people as the sort of folks who criticize something in an effort to show off how smart they are. In other words, I see them as incredibly insecure individuals. "Oh wow, that Star Wars movie was so lame. Lasers don't make noise, especially in space!" They're so busy trying to draw attention to themselves, they ruin the whole experience for everyone else.

>>11781 I'd agree with this. For example: I saw a discussion about The Millennium Falcon, and how impracticable its design was. These fools are completely ignorant of the aforementioned esoteric nature of media. Millennium is a reference to the Egyptian Thousand-Year Staph that some Gods hold as symbols of Eternity. The Falcon is Horus. The Millenium Falcon is the Eternal Sun God, and its shape is the Eye of Horus, aka Wedjat. That they made it somewhat functional as a starship is neat in of itself, its functionality is secondary to the occult significance of the craft juxtaposed with "space pirates" (black market smugglers who disobey the restrictions on goods of the King/Empire because Commerce is their God King, but it's a Commerce of Light / Sol / Eternal Soul, hence a sole pilot named Solo). It's all so blatant esoterically that it's almost not even worth mentioning such babby's-1st-deocculting-tier things... yet "critics" just blab on about space "facts", having never even visited it themselves, and only disinfo from authorities to regurgitate. I assure you that I'm not trying to "seem smart" when I turn a critical eye to Star Wars. "Critical" in my case means than I closely examine a work to extract any hidden meaning.

>>10827 Not much, more on the likes of how could I improve this than "this is soykaf because this or that" With tv or movies I switch off a lot too, so not much to nitpick if you don't pay it a lot of attention

It hurts when the author tries to write about world issues, and it's painfully obvious that he is a regular, uneducated wasp.

Critique is central to how I consume media. Whenever I'm done watching, reading, or playing something, I always take some time to write about it. What I valued about the work, what I thought was done poorly, what resonated with me in particular, whatever. Sometimes it's a long and unfocused rant, sometimes I have some grand thesis about the work I really want to get at, sometimes I don't have much to say at all. But if I feel strongly about a thing, I feel compelled to get it down so I have a record of the impact it had on me. Then I can go back and watch a movie and have a record of what I thought about it years ago, and think about how my understanding of art has changed, or how I've changed myself. It adds a whole dimension to the experience. I feel that critique is a very valuable practice. Critiquing the media you consume in a focused way, like writing, is the only way to "get better at critiquing," which is a bit of a nebulous concept. I would define it as the process of developing your understanding of your own relationship to media, what value you get out of it, and what you do and do not respond to. Since media is such a big part of so many of our lives, I think it's vital to really understand what kind of relationship that is. When you're trying to be critical about something, don't worry overly about trying to come up with a good/bad verdict on the thing. That's useful for making recommendations to friends, but outside of that it's a really shallow and uninteresting way of examining art. Try and grasp what it was attempting and what it accomplished within the context of your own understanding of media. Your aim is personal growth by expanding that understanding. It's also valuable to examine the emotional impact it had on you personally. Art largely exists for us to contextualize our own human experiences, so try and engage with it on that level too. Just PLEASE do not let your idea of "critique" end with finding technical flaws. Everything has those. They're mostly meaningless. A strong ability to critique should give you a whole new depth of appreciation for the things you really love, not destroy your ability to appreciate anything at all.

>>11792 >do not let your idea of "critique" end with finding technical flaws but finding technical flaws in works i enjoy is a lot of fun. i'm not a trained anything really, but i can pick out improper cinematography and quite like to imagine better shots on the same scene.

I'm far too critical of pretty much everything and it ruins many shows and movies for me. Being a musician doesn't help with being critical towards music too. I wish I could relax lainions

I can't enjoy almost anything new. And I am sure it's not me, but the entertainment that became garbage, because the old stuff is still good.

>>11813 That could still be you, as you are older now. Older things which are still new to you are in a paradigm you are familiar with even if you haven't seen or read them before. Also you now get to select the best of the past whereas you are inundated with the good bad and revolting of the present all at once. The forgettable contributions of the past don't get the same attention as the forgettable contributions of this week.

>>11798 Yeah, it's tons of fun imagining how to improve things, even if you don't have great knowledge of the subject maybe something interesting sparks up With that and being able to see what the author was trying to do I think you'd be able to enjoy most things

>>10827 I'm critical of nothing besides myself