Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media • Hacker News Board

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#51

Post by ex3xu » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 4:09 PM UTC

A similar sentiment from one of Haruki Murakami's characters in Norwegian Wood:

The better I got to know Nagasawa, the stranger he seemed. I had met a lot of strange people in my day, but none as strange as Nagasawa. He was a far more voracious reader than I, but he made it a rule never to touch a book by any author who had not been dead at least thirty years. “That’s the only kind of book I can trust,” he said.

“It’s not that I don’t believe in contemporary literature,” he added, “but I don’t want to waste valuable time reading any book that has not had the baptism of time. Life is too short.”

“What kind of authors do you like?” I asked, speaking in respectful tones to this man two years my senior. “Balzac, Dante, Joseph Conrad, Dickens,” he answered without hesitation.

“Not exactly fashionable.”

“That’s why I read them. If you only read the books that everyone else is reading, you can only think what everyone else is thinking. That’s the world of hicks and slobs. Real people would be ashamed of themselves doing that. Haven’t you noticed, Watanabe? You and I are the only real ones in the dorm. The other guys are crap.”

This took me off guard. “How can you say that?”

“’ Cause it’s true. I know. I can see it. It’s like we have marks on our foreheads. …”

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#52

Post by kinghtown » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 4:19 PM UTC

tallies wrote: post #26

As someone who apparently frequents much more pretentious online film circles than OP, the idea that the highest rated films and shows on IMDB represent the "best" of the mediums is kinda silly. The article uses Star Trek (2009) as its example of a mediocre film. Its IMDB rating is 7.9/10 from over 500k votes over 11 years -- surely this would place the film squarely in the "tried and tested" category. If I look on s…

I don’t think Netflix is entirely at fault. It’s sad how most people seem to be super ok with flushing the past down a toilet. Like anything from before they were born is irrelevant. I think it’s selfish in a way but mostly I think people are terrified of coming across as weird.

Like imagine going to work at a generic office and trying to talk about a half forgotten French movie like The Green Ray. There are too many unknowns (no recognizable cast, foreign film, kind of old) and I don’t think the average person has the fortitude to stand up to that kind of social situation so they avoid it instinctively.

But Netflix could definitely try harder instead of nurturing lazy entertainment. I don’t expect much from them since they made Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon 2 in English. What a lame decision.

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#53

Post by seg_lol » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 4:23 PM UTC

ex3xu wrote: post #51

A similar sentiment from one of Haruki Murakami's characters in Norwegian Wood: The better I got to know Nagasawa, the stranger he seemed. I had met a lot of strange people in my day, but none as strange as Nagasawa. He was a far more voracious reader than I, but he made it a rule never to touch a book by any author who had not been dead at least thirty years. “That’s the only kind of book I can trust,” he said. “It’…

Reading is amazing. Writing must be even crazier, to think all of what Murakami wrote came from inside his skull, that he has not only created those characters, but they live inside his simulation and create him as well.

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#54

Post by anm89 » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 4:32 PM UTC

I will never understand people that like Mulholland drive

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#55

Post by seg_lol » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 4:37 PM UTC

alexilliamson wrote: post #39

tallies wrote: post #26

As someone who apparently frequents much more pretentious online film circles than OP, the idea that the highest rated films and shows on IMDB represent the "best" of the mediums is kinda silly. The article uses Star Trek (2009) as its example of a mediocre film. Its IMDB rating is 7.9/10 from over 500k votes over 11 years -- surely this would place the film squarely in the "tried and tested" category. If I look on s…

This is why I used to love Rotten Tomatoes: between the audience score, the critic score, and the top critic score, you get three telling data points about what sort of person us likely to enjoy the movie. I have read a lot less film criticism since Roger Ebert died though. It seems like recently anything remotely enjoyable on rotten tomatoes gets above 90.

Most critics are jerks, passing off attitude and masquerading opinion as deep domain knowledge. The comic book guy trope from the Simpsons or Sponge Bob.

Roger Ebert [1] and Gene Siskel [2] were my introduction to analysis and argumentation. Watching two adults getting into a argument and discussing something using some sort of rules-of-engagement fascinated me. That they viewed a piece from so many angles, criticism is a skill and an art. Opinion shouldn't occupy more than 10% of result. ;)

I didn't understand the depth of that personal and professional relationship until I saw an interview with Ebert, where he teared up at the loss of his friend Gene. [3]

What are some other professional duos?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ebert

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Siskel

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Siskel#Death

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#56

Post by zozin » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 4:40 PM UTC

alexilliamson wrote: post #39

tallies wrote: post #26

As someone who apparently frequents much more pretentious online film circles than OP, the idea that the highest rated films and shows on IMDB represent the "best" of the mediums is kinda silly. The article uses Star Trek (2009) as its example of a mediocre film. Its IMDB rating is 7.9/10 from over 500k votes over 11 years -- surely this would place the film squarely in the "tried and tested" category. If I look on s…

This is why I used to love Rotten Tomatoes: between the audience score, the critic score, and the top critic score, you get three telling data points about what sort of person us likely to enjoy the movie. I have read a lot less film criticism since Roger Ebert died though. It seems like recently anything remotely enjoyable on rotten tomatoes gets above 90.

I believe this is because the current state of things on the web advocates for consumption instead of curation, and you can see this trend in every domain not just movies/media. Multi-billion dollar corporations do not want their investments subject to a random person's criticism, and from their perspective that makes perfect sense. It was very prudent and certainly much cheaper to coopt the entire field of media critique: Metacritic is owned by CBSViacom, Rotten Tomatoes is owned by Comcast, IMDB by Amazon. The old-media reviewers can get drowned out by new-media that is beholden to these corporations for access to interviews, swag, early-access, exclusives, etc. The corporations that create the media own the algorithms that tell you if the media is good or not.

The vast majority of the web has devolved similarly. Interested in a widget? If you Google "Widget Reviews" the first page is drowned out by listicles. Google gets the ad money, the listicle website gets the referral money, Amazon gets the retailer's cut plus maybe another Prime membership. There's very little incentive for fair and honest criticism on the web and every incentive for the big players to drown it out.

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#57

Post by AlexTWithBeard » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 4:43 PM UTC

Sometimes I wish there also were "news of the past", so that we could recall what was on our minds ten years ago and see it in the perspective.

Something like... Ten years ago Senate was voting to appoint John Doe a new supreme court judge. At that moment FNN Channel claimed it would be the end of the free world as we know it and Cox News praised the appointment as returning to the good old times. As we see now, ten years later neither prophecy was correct: the world has not ended and good old times did not return.

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#58

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 4:54 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #32

PaulRobinson wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you name a book or film that is popular 20+ years after it was first released that is bland? Even Disney films - the most idealistic in many ways - can hardly be considered bland. The typical Summer bland film or airport book which really is bland and overladen with tropes is rarely popular after a few years.

I'm not a movie person, but films like Home Alone, Back To The Future, Ghostbusters etc come to mind. My impression is that they are super hits that span generations because they are so predictable, middle of the road, easy to digest and unable to offend.

They were not predictable when released, which is partly why they became so popular. While none of them are ground breaking avant garde art, they all tweaked what was conventional, accepted and "predictable" in film making of the time. They became middle of the road partly because they helped to define the road.

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#59

Post by dbtc » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 5:05 PM UTC

seg_lol wrote: post #53

ex3xu wrote: post #51

A similar sentiment from one of Haruki Murakami's characters in Norwegian Wood: The better I got to know Nagasawa, the stranger he seemed. I had met a lot of strange people in my day, but none as strange as Nagasawa. He was a far more voracious reader than I, but he made it a rule never to touch a book by any author who had not been dead at least thirty years. “That’s the only kind of book I can trust,” he said. “It’…

Reading is amazing. Writing must be even crazier, to think all of what Murakami wrote came from inside his skull, that he has not only created those characters, but they live inside his simulation and create him as well.

Dreams can be pretty wild too

Re: Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

#60

Post by antognini » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 5:13 PM UTC

One of my favorite journalists, Jesse Walker, has an annual tradition where at the end of the year he posts his favorite movies not from the past year, but from 10 years ago. And then 10 years before that. And then 10 years before that, etc., going back decade by decade until there are no more movies. His philosophy is that 10 years is barely enough time to process which movies had any staying power, so how could he possibly judge which movies were worth watching from the past year?

Here is the end of his 2019 series (which includes links to all the other decades of that series): https://jessewalker.blogspot.com/2020/01/#342764971747282839...