Unpopular Opinion

[Neigedesmannes 70]

On 7/14/2019 at 7:33 AM, Gesu said:

The "it's Wednesday, my dudes" meme was fucking shite and so is the "nobody" meme. Funny at first, but then they just got so overused so quickly. Thank fuck both have pretty much died (I think the "nobody" meme is dead, anyways).

But atleast the wednesday frog is pretty cute.

[Delkmiroph 1649]

MH new faces...

i loved some new members ❤️ 

[psychonnect_rozen 585]

I lowkey like Taylor Swift hehe

[God 264]

bone in meat is all trash

[sleepy coffee 1476]

despite trash ass live action films in recent years,  the batman comics are still the best superhero content 

[Gesu 1537]

I don't like pixie cuts. No offence to anyone who has one/likes them, but it's the same thing with those trousers I mentioned before. Not hideous or anything, but I never really saw the appeal. 🤔

[Tokage 5930]

there is LITERALLY no reason for art critics of any sort to still exist in 2019

[suji 8317]

modern art fucking sucks

 

digital animation and cgi FUCKING SUCK

[Tokage 5930]

tfw all we have nowadays in terms of animated films is pretty much either soulless cgi pixarshit, ugly calarts tumblr uwu stuff or the demon known as 'anime' & stop-motion / claymation are fucking DEAD.... it's not fair bros, it's just not fair..........

 

Edited July 21, 2019 by Tokage

[Gesu 1537]

Just now, suji said:

modern art fucking sucks

Agreed. You just reminded me of a book I saw in my local bookstore called "Why Your Five-Year-Old Could Not Have Done That: Modern Art Explained". I didn't buy it, but I read some of it in the store and literally every example basically said "well, your five-year-old could have done that but they wouldn't have seen this deep, esoteric meaning behind it". I wish I was exaggerating. I think this picture puts it best.

 

 

Also, here's the Goodreads page for the book in case you were interested: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15917028-why-your-five-year-old-could-not-have-done-that

 

What a fucking joke.

[suji 8317]

modern art either 1) literally makes no sense 2) is so low effort that a 5 yr old could do it 3) always has to be fucking political

 

it's so fucking sad..... literally fuck post war art for fucking everything up :/// i currently follow artists whose art would've been popular in the Renaissance era yet now people sleep on that shit cuz it's not edgy enough......ugh <\3

[psychonnect_rozen 585]

Imma chime in with all this art shit.

 

38 minutes ago, suji said:

digital animation and cgi FUCKING SUCKS

I disagree. While yes, there are shitty CG films (Cats and Sonic) and yes they look hideous. The problem here is that everyone nowadays just SEES bad CG without realizing that most VFX on screen are great as long as they’re done well. Superhero fights, explosions, crashes, a whole city,etc. It sucks that many talented VFX artists are just cast aside and the shitty ones are given more attention.

 

41 minutes ago, suji said:

modern art fucking sucks

I’m sort of in the middle. One one hand, I think many talented artists exist in today’s world. On the other hand, it’s kind of hard to call a bunch of abstract shapes art. Then again, I’m not a big art person so I often don’t pay attention to modern art. To say all modern art sucks is an understatement because all the more...unusual arts are just stereotyped for ALL modern art. Same thing when people say “all modern music sucks”, there IS good music, your just not looking for it.

 

34 minutes ago, suji said:

always has to be fucking political

Again, I also disagree. IMO, I think that every form of art can have a good political message. I can’t name any paintings or art fitting those messages, but I’m okay with any form of art with a political message. I think everyone can share their political opinions in a respectful non pushy manner. Art is one of them. Sure you can disagree with it, but in my eyes, people who make political art should have a voice even if you disagree with it.

[Gesu 1537]

2 minutes ago, psychonnect_rozen said:

many talented artists exist in today’s world

Oh, this is definitely true. My favourite artist is probably Kerby Rosanes and he's a young artist of this century/decade. I guess the term "modern art" has become a genre in itself characterised by that shitty, "what does this mean" stuff we're used to seeing, and that's the kind I (and other people here) can't stand. I agree with the points made on both sides, really. I just hope more talented artists like Rosanes become more prominent in the art world to take over the abstract, meaningless stuff. I guess it's in the same way that there is good abstract art. For example, Megan Duncanson's art:

 

 

It's just that negative definitions tend to take over more positive ones, I think. 😕

[Tokage 5930]

Literally when has art not been political though? As much as I'm a fan of the ideal of art for art's sake, you can't really pretend  that art hasn't been co-opted by politics since like Ancient Rome. 

 

Edge and lack of sense are fine for me, not everything has to be conventionally beautiful or coherent to be good IMO. The main problem I personally have with a lot of contemporary art (at least the type  you'd stumble upon  in art galleries and such) is that half the time it feels like the works themselves are a mere afterthought and the narrative behind the work weighs in heavier when it comes to audience appreciation than the way in which said narrative is translated and ultimately expressed visually  by the artist (I'm just limiting this to visual media at this point, but you can definitely expand it beyond that scope to incorporate music and literature as well). It's all good and well  to incorporate your personal ideologies into your work, but the works themselves have to remain enjoyable on their own merits as well. The 'message' should be there to further enrich and enhance the material, it shouldn't subsume it and BECOME the material. At that point it just becomes soapboxing at best and outright propaganda at worst. I've disagreed with the idea that every creative work apparently needs to have some deeper layer to it ever since my first lit class in secondary school, and I don't think I'm ever gonna change my mind on that one. People often use the expression  'style over substance' to deride stuff, but apparently they just straight up forget that style IS substance as well, doubly so if we're talking about visual art. To me this type of people are equal to the ones who'll go like ''this song sucks bcuz it has no lyrics i can relate to :(" while entirely ignoring the actual music itself. It's focusing too much on one aspect of things and losing track of the bigger picture

[psychonnect_rozen 585]

8 minutes ago, Gesu said:

become a genre in itself characterised by that shitty, "what does this mean" stuff we're used to seeing, and that's the kind I (and other people here) can't stand. I agree with the points made on both sides

Agree. Even when I see stuff like that, I often am confused by what I'm looking at. Maybe it means something to the artist IDK. But yeah, I think those kinds of art are not shit, but I find them confusing and am often scratching my head as to why this was made. 

Edited July 21, 2019 by psychonnect_rozen

[psychonnect_rozen 585]

9 minutes ago, Gesu said:

It's just that negative definitions tend to take over more positive ones, I think. 😕

I think that goes for any form of entertainment honestly. Like when closed minded music fans think ALL modern music is bad, and bring up examples like Lil Pump or whatever, they ignore the best artists we have this generation. People like Kendrick, Gambino, Tyler, or litteraly ANY good rap or pop music is cast aside and they ALWAYS think modern music sucks without having the audacity to look for awesome music. 

 

I had a debate with a kid in my history class about this. One of those classic rock fans who think everything sucks nowadays. I was wearing my MCR shirt one day and he was all high and mighty about how my music is just emo garbage and that his music is better. I explained to him how closed minded he was and he was like 'Im NoT clOsEd MiNdeD". News flash dude, you kind of are.

[nekkichi 6043]

1 hour ago, suji said:

modern art fucking sucks

it's there to launder money and create art jobs and pretty much it;

 

I've been at pretty fascinating lectures on modern art which kind of blew my mind away by how much an educated mind can attribute to a piece of abstact, making no sense garbage to me that (clearly) wasn't implied by its createussé in any capacity,

 

and the explanation is henceforth presented as a part of arté objéts life cycle experience where whatever the viewer can see plays as much role as whatever the artist intentionally constructed, but let's just say, years later I question the authenticity of said detailed, phylosophical critical deconstruction as much as I do the author's skill and intent bc. see first line, because it doesn't take much to bullshit with a convincing distracted look once your initial art critique vocabulary and methodologies are academically trained.

[Tokage 5930]

see also: academics still tripping over each other to come up with ''new & alternative'' critical readings of shakespeare and all that horseshit

[Gesu 1537]

1 minute ago, Tokage said:

see also: academics still tripping over each other to come up with ''new & alternative'' critical readings of shakespeare and all that horseshit

My high school English teacher pretty much just told my class the exam board were just looking for a load of guff and basically said to just make something up about alliteration or whatever and they'd probably like it and I passed

[Tokage 5930]

Also, further re: the 'CGI is shit' topic - A lot of the time that stuff ABSOLUTELY definitely does inexcusably suck assk. There are scenes from the The Hobbit trilogy and many of the more recent MCU films that look like they're straight up taken from an early PS2 or PS3 game, and those are movies that cost MILLIONS to produce. The main problem, from how I've understood it, is that nowadays a lot of the time the CG  work you see in those 'epic' large scale fights in the Avengers and that sorta work. is outsourced by the Hollywood studios to some random companies in India or China to cut costs, something that may happen quite late in the movie's 'development cycle', meaning there's a definite case of time crunch involved as well. The results, understandably, are mediocre at best. Moreover, the type of VERY conspicuously CG'd stuff ages fast, extremely fast, even compared to practical effects work. Look at the CG in a film like The Lawnmower Man and just TRY try to convince me that shit holds up, I dare you. Hell, even the CG in the early Harry Potter movies is beginning to show its age already. Meanwhile, a lot of the practical effects in movies like Blade Runner, John Carpenter's The Thing, etc. still hold up well even to this day. Yeah, I'm admittedly cherrypicking w/ my examples, and there's definitely a lot of low-budget movies (and hell, even AAA ones) with hokey practical effects as well, but still, you get my point. Unlike with a lot of practical effects work, the best kind of CGI is the variety that you wouldn't actually think is CG'd in because it looks so inconspicuous, like inserting family photos into picture frames in the background for example. This contemporary practice where some films are nearly entirely shot in front of a green screen is a crock of bs

[Bear 1817]

The only problem with CGI is how directors and SFX artists use it. 

 

Jurassic Park proved that CGI could look amazing already all the way back in 1993. The CGI of today is, obviously, way, way better then back then, but the brains that decide how to use CGI nowadays only have something like 1/10th of the IQ and understanding of how to get the best out of it. Sad but true.

 

It's embarrassing to watch newer superhero movies where the fights areand all CGI, despite the fact that the physique's are stil so far off it looks like a third rate PS2 game no one likes because it felt like shit. And it gets even more emembarrassing when you realize how poorly choreographed the fights are and how easy it is to just use actors for the scenes. Awful stuff.

 

CGI should only be used when it's too hard/impossible to use practical effects. Because CGI as a tool is just brilliant. It's just the brains behind the CGI that isn't.

 

[psychonnect_rozen 585]

I enjoyed Captain Marvel and Black Panther. Were they the BEST Marvel movies? No. Were they enjoyable. Yup!

 

Those movies aren’t even in my Top 5 MCU films and I enjoyed them to some extent 

[God 264]

the only mcu flicks i watch are the ones that have tony stark in them, and even still i’m like 3 movies behind now.  but from what i’ve seen, i really can’t stand captain america.  😂 that dude pisses me off.

[psychonnect_rozen 585]

Just now, God said:

the only mcu flicks i watch are the ones that have tony stark in them, and even still i’m like 3 movies behind now.  but from what i’ve seen, i really can’t stand captain america.  😂 that dude pisses me off.

Oof I felt that. He's my favorite Avenger lol 

[God 264]

if we give it time, i’m sure live action anime adaptions will figure out what they’re doing.  let’s not forget, tim burton directed batman once.