"It Is Easier To Tear Down Than To Build Up"

Originally posted by Omega Vision
That's a poor comparison, lizards and elephants are apples to oranges, while poems are of a single set

They're both animals.

The Iliad is a poem.
Sonnet 18 is a poem.

I'd say they're as alike as a lizard and an elephant.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
[Band would all adhere to the same standards (flow, strength of voice, word choice, strength of images, power of evocation, etc) which would contrast with the standards set for non-literary writing or creative prose writing.[/B]

Valid, but not my point. Even if all poems were equally "good" they would not all be the same, that's a ridiculous Rand-esque claim that's more about reactionary fear of "collectivism" than anything else.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
If you were a lizard breeder or an elephant breeder you would certainly tell someone that some lizards are better than others, or some elephants are better than others.

How would I define "goodness" for a lizard, anyway?

Originally posted by Dr Will Hatch
Why DO people care more about Bale's voice than his acting?

The voice he uses is part of his acting, they're an integral part of his delivery. It is a great example of "trying to hard" and generally actors are supposed to draw attention away from the artificiality of fiction. Personally I fault Nolan more than Bale. Get him a voice coach and loop the line in post production if you have to.

Originally posted by Dr Will Hatch
I notice, none of these people offer solutions for improvement. How EXACTLY is Bale supposed to sound?

Not being able to suggest an improvement doesn't invalidate criticism (except in pragmatic circumstances, which I can't imagine applying art criticism). Aiming more toward Kevin Conroy and less toward "Dad making his monster voice for the kids" would be a good start, if you want.

It's not easier to criticize. Neither is all criticism negative. The reason so much criticism is negative is because so little is good, and because, of course, nothing is perfect. For every Tarantino film, there are two Michael Bay films, for example. I think this might be the cause of the phenomena you are experiencing.

I think a lot of tearing down and building up happens all the time, and a lot of the time I think the tear-downs and build-ups are undeserved, but that's just because I thought that hipster popular new whatever was just 'OK'.

That being said, I think there might be a case for the idea that it's easier to spur a mob to hate something than a crowd to cheer something on, which isn't exactly (but maybe related to?) what the thread starter was getting at.

Originally posted by Dr Will Hatch
Nitpicking exposes the flaws in these stories or works, but the kind of demonizing "criticism" that I see usually boils to "X and X are flaws, ergo, the entire movie/game/whatever is a piece of shit."

imo this can be very simplified.

1). you can have people that didn't like the movie and had no real reason so they blame it on these flaws...or plot holes just so they have a reason.

&

2). Sometimes it somethings do genuinely ruin movies/works of art for people and others can be like "ooh that's no big deal". A good example would be Look at the Indy with the crystal skull. I thought the movie was alright until It was reveled to be extra dimension aliens. It ruined the whole for me. Some people say "why? Didn't you expect that since it was about a crystal skull? Heck the thing even looked like an alien." Thats a good rebuttal but since indy always fallowed the occult type of theme I expected the movie to continue that route. sorry I ranted a little there but I think you should get my point. lol

Man is self distructive and we have it in are need to kill rather than be killed, so ill go with tear down rather than build up. A good example to this is an angry mob scenario..people act first than think later.

Originally posted by Existere
I think a lot of tearing down and building up happens all the time, and a lot of the time I think the tear-downs and build-ups are undeserved, but that's just because I thought that hipster popular new whatever was just 'OK'.

That being said, I think there might be a case for the idea that it's easier to spur a mob to hate something than a crowd to cheer something on, which isn't exactly (but maybe related to?) what the thread starter was getting at.

we think alike..

Originally posted by rudester
we think alike..

Hmm...

Originally posted by rudester
Man is self distructive and we have it in are need to kill rather than be killed

rudester got smurphed

Yes it is easier to tear down than build up.