Criticizing Uniqueness

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Seth Koopa) — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:47:01 GMT

Crawl and 1OOO wrote:
John K.'s argument was that animation should do what only animation can do. And, yes, live action can't do Looney Tunes (except maybe The Mask or Roger Rabbit, but those only make sense in reference to Looney Tunes).

But, yeah, it's not like that's the only thing animation can do. Like, The Pirates of Dark Water wasn't even that high a profile a cartoon. But how many...

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (ErniePants) — Fri, 23 May 2008 13:02:21 GMT

Crawl and 1OOO wrote:
This is something I've been thinking about lately. Usually, when I see amatures doing something (webcomics being a particular example, but it could be anything -- music, writing, whatever), and they get suggestions to improve, it almost always boils down to advice to make THEIR thing just like EVERYONE ELSE's thing.

That's pretty much what happens if anyone...

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Kitsunexus) — Fri, 16 May 2008 20:44:18 GMT

Flying Omelette wrote:
Well, there's a difference between putting a unique twist on something and saying it's totally unique. I did the former.

John K.'s argument was that animation should do what only animation can do. And, yes, live action can't do Looney Tunes (except maybe The Mask or Roger Rabbit, but those only make sense in reference to Looney Tunes).
...

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Flying Omelette) — Fri, 16 May 2008 19:49:37 GMT

Well, there's a difference between putting a unique twist on something and saying it's totally unique. I did the former.

John K.'s argument was that animation should do what only animation can do. And, yes, live action can't do Looney Tunes (except maybe The Mask or Roger Rabbit, but those only make sense in reference to Looney Tunes).

You know, I've actually said this before, but in a way I can kind of agree with him about...

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Crawl and 1OOO) — Fri, 16 May 2008 12:44:12 GMT

And don't forget, when it comes to stuff like "It was all a dream", there's still a difference between "doing it right" and "being unique". Like, stories about mobsters might be able to be done right, but even so, that doesn't make it unique.

Beautiful Dreamer was something else altogether, since it didn't end with a reveal that it was a dream. For Newhart (which I haven't seen, just heard about), maybe there's a chance it was...

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Crawl and 1OOO) — Fri, 16 May 2008 10:07:34 GMT

John K.'s argument was that animation should do what only animation can do. And, yes, live action can't do Looney Tunes (except maybe The Mask or Roger Rabbit, but those only make sense in reference to Looney Tunes).

But, yeah, it's not like that's the only thing animation can do. Like, The Pirates of Dark Water wasn't even that high a profile a cartoon. But how many millions of dollars, how many special effects, how many sets, would it have taken to make a...

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Flying Omelette) — Fri, 16 May 2008 06:44:48 GMT

Crawl and 1OOO wrote:

Of course, it is appropriate to criticize something that is only superficially unique.
Maybe even a better example would be the "It's only a dream" ending.

First, everyone thinks, "Oh, my God! Wouldn't it be so surprising to end a story by having it just be a dream?"

Then they realize, "Oh, wait. Actually, everyone...

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Kitsunexus) — Fri, 16 May 2008 04:14:50 GMT

Crawl and 1OOO wrote:
This topic has nothing to do with whether or not Christianity is unique.

It's not.

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Crawl and 1OOO) — Thu, 15 May 2008 21:06:08 GMT

That is completely unrelated to the point I was making. I was saying a superficial way of being unique is to be "shocking", but some things that are dismissed as merely shock material actually have more to it than that.

This topic has nothing to do with whether or not Christianity is unique. If you want to talk about that issue, start a new topic.

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (da dick) — Thu, 15 May 2008 20:49:20 GMT

i really can't categorise anything related to one of the most popular religions under anything which is suppose to embody "unique-ness", however defined.

christianity ripped off that jewish religion.

your example is fundamentally flawed.

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Crawl and 1OOO) — Thu, 15 May 2008 13:15:22 GMT

Of course, it is appropriate to criticize something that is only superficially unique.

Maybe even a better example would be the "It's only a dream" ending.

First, everyone thinks, "Oh, my God! Wouldn't it be so surprising to end a story by having it just be a dream?"

Then they realize, "Oh, wait. Actually, everyone has had that idea. Scrap it."

But some...

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Crawl and 1OOO) — Thu, 15 May 2008 09:20:16 GMT

What? If something is a rip-off, it's not unique.

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Kitsunexus) — Thu, 15 May 2008 02:45:58 GMT

But what if uniqueness really IS the flaw, like if someone was unintentionally ripping their inspiration off. Wouldn't that be constructive criticism?

Oh and John Dilworth > John Kricfalusi

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Crawl and 1OOO) — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:25:13 GMT

Please don't reply to threads in this forum if you can't stay on topic.

This forum, I think, should be allowed to have more of a serious slant than the others.

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (da dick) — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:07:55 GMT

jebus can't possibly be more unique than FSM or any "exotic" eastern deity/god/saint/holyman

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Flying Omelette) — Fri, 09 May 2008 23:06:32 GMT

That's precisely what I was talking about when I said that you can't really go anywhere on the internet for good criticism. It will ultimately be bullshit like, "Do it all on the computer" or "not anime enough".

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Crawl and 1OOO) — Fri, 09 May 2008 09:06:06 GMT

Here's one more example.

Game reviews.

Bad game reviews are just about NEVER unique. Triple A, buy or rent?, irrelevant openings, graphics sections, and on and on.

Those are pretty easy to criticize.

But I don't know how often other things are that easy to criticize.

Re: Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Crawl and 1OOO) — Fri, 09 May 2008 08:58:43 GMT

Of course, it is appropriate to criticize something that is only superficially unique.

What I mean by that is, sometimes people get the bright idea to do something that they think no one else has done. In reality, millions of people have had that idea, but they realized it was a bad idea. So, it's not highly represented, but it's definitely not unique.

An example would be telling a story that has no point. Most stories have a point, you'd probably be told as...

Criticizing Uniqueness

feeds@yuku.com (Crawl and 1OOO) — Fri, 09 May 2008 08:50:36 GMT

This is something I've been thinking about lately. Usually, when I see amatures doing something (webcomics being a particular example, but it could be anything -- music, writing, whatever), and they get suggestions to improve, it almost always boils down to advice to make THEIR thing just like EVERYONE ELSE's thing.

There are at least two lines of thought for that type of criticism. Number one, it's telling the artist, "You're not a beautiful snowflake."...