>animation critic talks massive shit about various cartoons

yes that is generally what those unable to create do, criticise

>>93572459
You don't have to be good at something to give out about it.

File: 300px-20060331.jpg (23KB, 300x410px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 300x410px

HMMMMMMM

>>93572459
NAME 10 MOVIES 3 FLICKS AND 8 CINEMAS WHERE THIS HAPPENED

>>93572459
You just exactly described Dobson.

>>93572477
I thought this was about people who are able to do, but do it poorly.

>>93572484
Yes you do, if you are gonna talk shit about the art of a show you should at least know the basics of cartooning to point out what is wrong

Your comment is the most stupid shit ever, if your own stuff is shit that only reflects your shit taste

File: no soul.gif (520KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 500x375px

>animation critic talks massive shit about various cartoons
>praise anime and openly say is a weaboo
>it's all shit

>>93572459
I hope you like all Twilight, Transformers and DC movies anon.
You'll never film anything better in your life, so you must like them
No criticism allowed.
Time to go on your new-PPG marathon too.

>>93572484
Too bad most cartoon reviewers also suck at reviewing.

>>93572573
The point is that if you're going to be a critic AND a content creator, then at least follow some of the criticisms you dish out.

>>93572638
So what if someone is better at pointing out flaws than executing?
Should they silence their amazing criticising skills, depriving the world of their wits and analysis?
So that people worse than them at criticising can speak up in their place, because they're good at doing something else (executing)?

Do you deny at all that the understanding and global view necessary for criticism is a different set of skills from the focus, concentration and unity of purpose necessary for execution?

>>93572573

You're allowed to not like something, and to explain why you don't like it. That's everyone's right. But criticism is meant to come from a place of knowledge and experience. People who act as though their opinions are not just valid for themselves, but apply as objective rules which creators should follow, are delusional.

>>93572459
Are you talking about the entirety of /ic/?

File: Engineer Updates.jpg (199KB, 554x603px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 554x603px

>Top 10 Worst _____
>#__
>*disgusted sigh*

>>93572459
You don't need to be a director to know that The Room is a shitty movie, don't need to be a game designer to know Yooka-Laylee or Mighty No. 9 are bad games, don't need to be a writer to know Lionel Suggs is a hack, and you don't need to be an internet reviewer to know Doug is an incompetent manchild.

>>93572779
that's false because /ic/ doesn't shit on animation like /co/ does and can appreciate both anime and cartoons in the same thread but yeah, 90% /ic/ won't "make it"

>all this generalization
>not saying "people on /co/"
You guys are lazy thinkers.

>>93572761

I get what you're saying my man, but theres a diference between "I don't like this car becouse its red" and "I don't like this car becouse it has no engine, doors or wheels", you don't have to be a genius to notice that the car has no wheels ot engine and you don't need a certificate to know why that's a bad thing for a car.

>>93572459
Do as I say not as I do!

>>93572533
take a second to analyze what you're saying moron, you're saying nearly everyone has shit taste, I'd like to see your cartoon faggot

>>93572638
the mistake is never in creating something shitty, but in publishing it. Before the internet, anyone could safely make anything while they were learning and have it safely sit in obscurity, and there were specific people whose job it was to decide what kind of content was worth distributing around the world

how old was linkara when he made lightbringer anyway?

>>93573159
>how old was linkara when he made lightbringer anyway?
18 when the comic started, 25 when he stopped updating it.

>>93572459
Surprise surprise
It's easier to tear something down than building it up.
who woulda thunk?

File: IMG_6447.jpg (18KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 200x200px

I'm not sure who you're referring to, OP

>>93572862
You don't need to be a director to know the Room is shit but being the director of Birdemic and criticizing the Room is quite the invitation for snark. God forbid the critic gets criticized, too.

Alright, Roger Ebert should never have been allowed to write reviews, gotcha.

File: Hank631.jpg (67KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 500x375px

>>93572814
>*disgusted sigh*
So you wont have to do that ever again anon, here

>>93572533
Let's say I pay a carpenter to make me a table, and the legs are all different lengths. The thing can't stand upright and keeps falling over.

Do I have to be able to build a table myself to understand that this table is shit?

>>93573380
>gave The Thing (1982) 2 stars
>gave Big Trouble In Little China 2 stars
>gave The Phantom Menace 4 stars
You're right, he shouldn't have been allowed.

>>93573332
Mysterious literally did nothing wrong
Except give 12 Oz. Mouse shit

>>93572533
Knowing the basics of something and actually being skilled in the particular area are not the same thing.

>>93573426
>wow he disagrees with me that means his taste is shit

>>93574556
Woah you sure got me

File: Poster3_beyond_the_valley_of_the_dolls.jpg (44KB, 423x325px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 423x325px

>>93573380

Ebert did write a screenplay and it got made into the best movie ever.

>>93573426
>hated a shitty movie
>hated a shitty movie
>liked a decent movie

Your point?

>>93572533
people like you are such moronic imbeciles and I laugh in spite every time this argumentative "point" is brought up.

File: IMG_6442.jpg (61KB, 500x390px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 500x390px

>>93574727
>wow you disagree with me that means you have shit taste
Gosh damn it, I just got trolled on the internet.

At least he's dead while John Carpenter is still alive.

>>93574803
Nice picture of yourself that you posted. Also, don't talk shit about Roger Ebert if you know what's good for you.

>>93572459
at least there not linkara levels of shit a hypocrisy

>>93574829
but that's not him, that's me.

File: DALF2Mq.png (16KB, 174x231px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 174x231px

>"animation critic"
>It's just some manchild with a youtube account and a knowledge of 2000s Cartoon Network

File: sticker,375x360.u3.png (66KB, 375x360px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 375x360px

>>93572459

>>93577473
Bingo

File: bill watterson.jpg (6KB, 186x186px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 186x186px

>>93572459
>comic critic talks massive shit about various comics
>they also happen to draw comics themselves
>It's declared one of the greatest comics ever written

File: even better.jpg (63KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 900x900px

>>93577473

>>93577631
He was right, though.

>ROGER EBERT NEVER DIRECTED THE GREAT AMERICAN MOVIE, HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE

>>93573380
Why do people shit on Roger Ebert when most internet critics were influenced by Mystery Science Theater 3000?

>>93577473
god I fucking hate that avatar. I'd rather deepthroat motorboat a furious rattlesnake out on a hot day than drawing this faggot.

File: IMG_5475.jpg (15KB, 175x200px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 175x200px

>>93573774
>the autistic neckbeard brony

>>93572459
Who is this about? I can't think of any examples.

>>93573402
He meant that the reviewer starts off with #__ with a disgusted sigh.

>>93572739
Cartoon critics are more often than not full of themselves and unable to take criticism.

It's not just that they're bad, it's that they're bad and yet full of themselves.

File: growing_around_poster__concept_by_john_enter_by_angeli_the_icefairy-d7sa3gt.png (1MB, 1024x1283px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x1283px

>>93579837
MrEnter most likely

File: 1379267038012.jpg (18KB, 352x240px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 352x240px

>cartoon reviewers/critiques on Youtube
These assholes are in the same tier as people who make reaction videos

>>93573405
Why would you hire a carpenter to make furniture?