Captain Marvel - An exceptionally late critique

What that phrase refers to is not the time to make the media/review, but the time needed to view/read them. It took me roughly 2 hours to read the whole thing, and I skimmed a few parts (I read it all in one sitting, so that’s fairly accurate). The runtime of the movie is a little over 2 hours, so it’s close to, possibly longer than, the time to watch the movie.

I still read it (most of it, anyway), but I’m used to reading/watching long reviews of stuff.

3 Likes

I mean, Kini made it clear that I should have made it shorter, but that statement cannot refer exclusively at the tine to read/watch it, as there are other factora influencing it.

The “make it shorter” comment refers exclusively to the principle of “Don’t use ten words when three will do.”

You’ve picked specific pieces of what I said to counter but you haven’t countered the spirit of what I said, which is simply this: Your critique was not truly a critique in the sense that it was stream-of-consciousness. More importantly, your “jokes” do not come across as jokes when you’re in a position where you’re not being funny.

If i write a proper, objective critique, I’m not making jokes. At least, not in the way that would infer that I am calling out my audience in a negative way.

As for your presenting the norms of the MCU, you can do so without devoting an entire passage to establishing them. The onus is not on you to provide every piece of necessary context when comparing films - the reader must decide how relevant the comparison is and research/watch themselves for context. A mini essay on the comparison’s context is not needed - brevity is good.

As for your main question being why Danvers never asked why only SHE got a chip-thing, there’s also a certain amount of “special child” inherent in that. If you’re told “Hey, you’re special and this is to help you” and you have NO OUTSIDE INFLUENCE BECAUSE YOU LOST YOUR MEMORY, you’re probably not gonna go out of your way to question it too much. People like to be special.

The essence of my nitpicking comments is simply that for you, things that you feel need explanation are things I feel are easily inferred - and thus they feel nitpicky to me. I don’t -need- every single thing explained to me because I can suspend my disbelief long enough to enjoy it. Plus, a lot of things that you called out as making no sense are classic movie tropes, at which point calling out classic tropes that everyone can recognise that don’t necessarily detract from the movie is, in my eyes, nitpicking.

When I say that you failed to make this a proper critique out the gate, I’m referencing you feeling the need to disclaim your post. If you TRULY believed that you executed a critical, proper review than you shouldn’t have felt the need to post that disclaimer at the beginning, given that the likelyhood of someone on the site reading long enough to bother reporting it is low. Additionally, if you make a truly critical critique properly there would be no reason for anyone to report this post in the first place.

Last but not least, saying “Years went into making the movie so it’s definitely longer than the review” is irrelevant and dismissive - there are six hour long reviews of Star Wars Movies. This is the text equivalent of those, and therefore Holi’s statement stands true

5 Likes

But pure desinterest is also illogical.

Again, example?

That was for those who wanted to flag it as part of the original topic, that’s all.

With the strict board rules…

Didn’t said that.

I saw one of them, I never compared mine with thise.

Six hours translate into 100+ pages

A proper critique of the film most likely wouldn’t violate said rules

1 Like

So I didn’t want to get involved in this, but I feel like I have to try and clarify some of what Kini is saying as you’re taking things a bit too literally

I’m not exactly sure what to respond to this with, so I’ll leave it for Kini

I’ll also leave this for Kini, as I don’t feel like searching through the critique

If you had a feeling that somebody was going to flag the topic, then that tells you that some of the points you’re making might be a bit too controversial for the boards

You can make a good critique of a movie without having to get into the politics surrounding said movie

You didn’t specifically say that, but what Kini is trying to say is that what he felt you were implying with your reply to Racie

Here, Kini is just giving an example of a really long review

Again, this was an example, he wasn’t saying your review was exactly like the six-hour-long star wars reviews

Also, I just wanted to add on to something Kini said. When you write a review aimed at a certain audience, don’t insult or call out said audience in a negative way. Otherwise, they’ll feel like your critiques are invalid because you don’t accept their views as valid and they probably won’t even read the rest of it

1 Like

I was refering at the no dupe topics rules.

That one and two, dupe topics are not allowed.
I said in that disclaimer that its main purpose was to inform about the mods allowing it as a separate entity.
There could have been big chances for somebody else to flag it as spam, and then it would either be merged with the CM topic, or due to its sizes it would be closed.

When it comes of CM, you kinda have to talk about its politics. Did I make that category too long? Probably. But seeing that the agenda does indeed affect the quality of the movie, I had to talk about them.

I get it. I wanted to refference the writer’s main defense and to make a joke out of it. It was wrong, can we moove on?

1 Like