Still just awesome like that
I stopped watching Bennett after his terrible "Top 100 Worst Billboard #1s" (or whatever that list was called). Not that I watched him much to begin with (I don't care enough about anime to watch anime reviewers), but those videos were just awful, with the worst reasons given for everything here (e.g. listing a Frankie Valli And The Four Seasons song simply to complain about how he doesn't like falsetto singing).
Insert witty 'n clever quip here.
^Umm, what the hell is that video that I have never heard of and how many years ago that was? And why would you stop watching guy's videos based on one video that isn't related to what he normally reviews?
^^He thinks movie really doesn't have anything besides cool fight scenes going for it, but if that is only reason you'd want to watch the movie then why not just play the game? Thats his basic opinion on it.
edited 15th Jul '14 12:23:54 PM by SpookyMask
Still just awesome like that
Starts with this video, and there's one or two more
.
I'm very passionate about music, and I don't like people dismissing important pieces of music offhand just because of their personal biases. It's very possible to separate one's own tastes from a measurement of objective quality, but Bennett seems to struggle with that greatly throughout the list, a sign of a bad critic.
And I only ever watched his music-related videos (however few they were), so it's not like I've really ever had any other reason to watch him since anyway.
Insert witty 'n clever quip here.
Nevermind.
edited 15th Jul '14 12:27:47 PM by Motyka5
Just a person. He/him.
^^Riiight, but that his personal opinion list right? 
I'm pretty sure music is never objective thing to talk about.
Seriously, talking about music without bias is impossible. Like, I hate all rap music
No, it's not. If you hate all Rap and you're not going to evaluate it on its own criteria (rhymes+samples+beats and bassline, ando so forth), then you shouldn't even be talking about Rap. But it's perfectly possible to evaluate something that is not within your area, if you can find stuff that is good or noteworthy. After all, a guy like Lester Bangs was never a fan of Electronic Music, yet he talked about Kraftwerk's Autobahn in a way that he foreshadowed the future. That's because he understood the criteria that was gonna form within the Electronic Music circles.
Being open-minded also helps, of course.
For me there are several movies, which justify their excistence by having great action. Sure, there should be some kind of motivation for the characters, but in the end I watch Drunken Master, Snake in the Eagle's Shadow, Ninja in the Dragon's Den and Police Story, because they have great action, not because they have some sort of deep social commentary. I honestly doubt Gisaburo Sugii was trying to top Night On The Galactic Railroad, when directing SFII.
edited 15th Jul '14 1:41:13 PM by harkko
Visiting from the Hoag Galaxy
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Yep, and movies necessarily have a different type of action from video games.
Another movie justified by its fight scenes is Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children. It makes absolutely no sense, it behaves like several characters are from the game when they weren't so they aren't introduced and the voice acting is kind of blah, but the action scenes are absolutely incredible.
Not Three Laws compliant.
Still just awesome like that
@Spooky: Refer to Quag15's post. You can be both objective and subjective about music. When you're being subjective, it's "I like/dislike this song." When you're being objective, it's "I will evaluate this song on its own terms to see if it is a quality song, both within and without the standards set by its genre and by standards of music, including quality of performance, composition, lyrics, themes, originality, etc." You can't just say "This song sucks because I think it sounds awful," and that's what Bennett did for most of his list.
Contrast this with Todd's style, where he at least tries to give a cogent, objective analysis of the song. He says whether or not he likes it, but he doesn't steamroll his analyses with his opinion (unless it's Chris Brown). And he does it without all the snobby attitude that Bennett demonstrates in his video (and instead with a more legitimately humorous tone, rather than what comes off as whining).
Insert witty 'n clever quip here.
I happen to like Bennet' s reviews. But sometimes the difference between criticism and whining is very thin line.
But songs are pieces of entertainment. Whether a piece of entertainment is good or bad depends on whether it's entertaining, which is entirely subjective, so objective analysis of its quality is impossible.
There are some songs popularly considered more entertaining than others and some considered less entertaining. Not saying that popularity equals right, but rather that their joint agreement may be implying a concrete quality status underneath.
And whenever someone does top whatever list, its always going to be their personal opinion so they don't really need to justify "objectively" why this is their top whatever list
edited 15th Jul '14 11:49:32 PM by SpookyMask
Okay Guy
While you can't objectively determine weather a song is good or bad, a good reviewer will make an in-depth argument for their opinion.
If you think a song sucks because you hate falsetto singing then you're not wrong, but it won't be much of a review if you don't go deeper than that.
edited 16th Jul '14 12:04:55 AM by DrStarky
Put me in motion, drink the potion, use the lotion, drain the ocean, cause commotion, fake devotion, entertain a notion, be Nova Scotian
Mhm. Subjectivity isn't a black box; people arrive at their opinions for reasons.
^^Since when top whatever lists are actually reviews? <_<
Until further notice
They're reviews in miniature - most of the time, there's an explanation for why something ends up on the list and in a particular position.
Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
Yeah, but reviewing isn't just telling what your opinion is <_<
This week on The Blockbuster Buster, E-Rod goes to war with I, Frankenstein.
Next week: Stan Lee's Top 10 Awesome Achievements.
- Dooming Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby to relative obscurity
- Overriding their creative contributions at damn near every opertunity
- Taking credit for their work on numerous occasions
- Screwing them out of royalties
- Effectively making himself the face of the company though sheer charisma rather than competence
Hm...what're the last five?
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
It was a good review, but I get really annoyed whenever people do the "Frankenstein is the scientist, not the monster" thing.
Frankenstein is a surname, so it makes sense that a living being created by a guy named Frankenstein would also have the surname Frankenstein.
Still just awesome like that
Mad Scientist Wannabe
Creating one of the worst superheroines ever.
Pissing off Alan Moore enough to ensure he never works for Marvel EVER.
Creating the weirdest commercial for Alienware, eSurance, ECW and Dark Horse Comics I have ever seen.
Sticking his wrinkled nose into movies created by much more talented people than himself, constantly.
That's ten!
edited 20th Jul '14 8:28:41 PM by maxwellelvis
Of course, don't you know anything about ALCHEMY?!- Twin clones of Ivan the Great
Someone's Salty
Has Bennett improved at all since the Film Brain crossover, where they reviewed Batman Returns? Whereas Film Brain criticizes the film in a calm and analytical manner, Bennett sounds extremely whiny.
In my opinion the plot is perfectly serviceable for the type of film Street Fighter II: The Movie is. I rarely watch martial arts movies for their plots. All I care is that the protagonist is likeable, the villain hatable and that the plot doesn't get in the way of the action and the action is good, which wasn't the case with the live-action Street Fighter movie.