|
Post by Meth Lab Shenanigans on Sept 10, 2015 6:38:15 GMT -5
The Sublime hatesong was genuinely one of the worst things I've read on any pop culture website, and I don't even like Sublime. It's very rare that an innocuous pop culture interview makes me come away with the feeling that the person being interviewed is genuinely a soulless piece of shit, but wow, that one sure accomplished it. Sonia was a pretty terrible reviewer towards the end and said a lot of dumb stuff, but the number and dedication of the misogynistic trolls that targeted her makes me a bit less eager to rip her a new one. Nothing she did even came close to warranting the response it got. This coming from the site’s music editor is pretty ridiculous For whatever reason, I didn't realize Marah was the site's music editor. This probably explains why I no longer care about the AVC's music coverage as they skew hard into ten page long Taylor Swift think pieces. Based on her articles, Marah knows nothing but Gen X nostalgia. She likes what was hip in the '90s and essentially nothing else. It's laughable that they put her in charge of music. Seems like a nice person, but wow, not her strong point.
|
|
Baron von Costume
TI Forumite
Like an iron maiden made of pillows... the punishment is decadence!
Posts: 4,683
|
Post by Baron von Costume on Sept 10, 2015 9:07:41 GMT -5
The Green Day one was probably the most terrible one for me. I don't even like GD but man, you think you could have at least done 5 mins of research before you posted that convo.
|
|
|
Post by Meth Lab Shenanigans on Sept 10, 2015 9:19:13 GMT -5
The Green Day one was probably the most terrible one for me. I don't even like GD but man, you think you could have at least done 5 mins of research before you posted that convo. In terms of sheer cluelessness, I'd say the Nirvana and Macklemore ones are tied, though the latter has the edge thanks to the claim that he's stealing poor people's culture. I don't remember the Green Day one- maybe I suppressed it...
|
|
Post-Lupin
Prolific Poster
Immanentizing the Eschaton
Posts: 5,673
|
Post by Post-Lupin on Sept 10, 2015 11:40:40 GMT -5
All my joking about John Titor and time machines aside, I agree that shitcanning Pierce for what he did was kind of overkill. It's not like he was a cop falsifying police reports and because of his actions hundreds of convictions could be overturned...he was a guy who wrote a "It was pretty good," book review for a book he didn't read. As a journalist and occasional reviewer, I think he deserved it. Basic rule: if you're writing a review of a book, fucking read it. If you're going to say you like something, have a fucking reason. Anything less is at best false advertising, at worst outright lies. No, he wasn't a cop faking reports. But he was still faking.
|
|
|
Post by William T. Goat, Esq. on Sept 10, 2015 21:15:56 GMT -5
What puzzles me about the whole Leonard Pierce issue is, don't the writers get assignments? That is, didn't an editor or some higher-up person tell him to review that book? And if so, was that higher-up person aware that the book didn't exist?
…Was it a trap?
|
|
|
Post by Pastafarian on Sept 10, 2015 22:38:42 GMT -5
Hatesong is a bad feature. It is bad and not what I want out of the site, but what can they do? Clearly every single Hatesong gets ridiculous amounts of comments probably in excess of what most every other feature receives, and even if some or many or most or all of those are comments are about how much they dislike Hatesong, clicks are clicks. Everyone complains about it, but in all likelihood our complaints are keeping it afloat. Kinda like Tolerability Index then? Amelie will be the last person standing at that site, and all because people like posting what they had for dinner the night before or what is playing on their ipod at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Pastafarian on Sept 10, 2015 22:42:45 GMT -5
The Sublime hatesong was genuinely one of the worst things I've read on any pop culture website, and I don't even like Sublime. It's very rare that an innocuous pop culture interview makes me come away with the feeling that the person being interviewed is genuinely a soulless piece of shit, but wow, that one sure accomplished it. Sonia was a pretty terrible reviewer towards the end and said a lot of dumb stuff, but the number and dedication of the misogynistic trolls that targeted her makes me a bit less eager to rip her a new one. Nothing she did even came close to warranting the response it got. For whatever reason, I didn't realize Marah was the site's music editor. This probably explains why I no longer care about the AVC's music coverage as they skew hard into ten page long Taylor Swift think pieces. Based on her articles, Marah knows nothing but Gen X nostalgia. She likes what was hip in the '90s and essentially nothing else. It's laughable that they put her in charge of music. Seems like a nice person, but wow, not her strong point Agreed that nothing Sonia said deserved the ridiculous shit storm that followed her from those Leftovers comments almost until she left. But crazy people will find reasons to be crazy regardless. I just remember reading that line and thinking "Huh, I wonder what Matthew Shepard's family would think about this." It seemed so monumentally tone deaf. Then the asshole brigade arrived.
|
|
|
Post by Meth Lab Shenanigans on Sept 10, 2015 23:28:32 GMT -5
The Sublime hatesong was genuinely one of the worst things I've read on any pop culture website, and I don't even like Sublime. It's very rare that an innocuous pop culture interview makes me come away with the feeling that the person being interviewed is genuinely a soulless piece of shit, but wow, that one sure accomplished it. Sonia was a pretty terrible reviewer towards the end and said a lot of dumb stuff, but the number and dedication of the misogynistic trolls that targeted her makes me a bit less eager to rip her a new one. Nothing she did even came close to warranting the response it got. Based on her articles, Marah knows nothing but Gen X nostalgia. She likes what was hip in the '90s and essentially nothing else. It's laughable that they put her in charge of music. Seems like a nice person, but wow, not her strong point Agreed that nothing Sonia said deserved the ridiculous shit storm that followed her from those Leftovers comments almost until she left. But crazy people will find reasons to be crazy regardless. I just remember reading that line and thinking "Huh, I wonder what Matthew Shepard's family would think about this." It seemed so monumentally tone deaf. Then the asshole brigade arrived. What stunned me was how incredibly immature and simplistic her reasoning was, and how incredibly childish her twitter response to the criticism was. She honestly sounded like a teenager. But, wow, that comments section definitely devolved into something much nastier than I naively anticipated.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2015 8:21:38 GMT -5
Based on her articles, Marah knows nothing but Gen X nostalgia. She likes what was hip in the '90s and essentially nothing else. It's laughable that they put her in charge of music. Seems like a nice person, but wow, not her strong point. That sort of gets to what I said in another post about how I think I could sit down and have a conversation with her about certain subjects and enjoy it - I feel like we'd definitely have a lot of common ground in what seems to be our shared love of riot grrrl bands and stuff similar to that, even though I deduct a ton of points for calling Sleater-Kinney's The Woods "just okay." And then I see the smug my-taste-is-so-refined version of her in something like Hatesong articles and it really puts me off, followed by the nearly uncritically-positive Swift articles, and I just check out completely.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2015 8:38:29 GMT -5
Here's a thing, on the topic of blunders:
While I'm not prepared to say that the feature sucked after this change (I think the signal-to-noise ratio was getting progressively worse before the change happened), I *do* feel like Undercover lost a lot of its charm after they got rid of the little round room. I guess I just miss the cozy ambiance, and it seemed appropriate for the feature.
I guess said change happening during one of my least-favorite Undercover seasons didn't help. Adding in the side walls made it a little better, but it still just feels "off" to me.
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Lemur on Sept 11, 2015 13:53:59 GMT -5
Judkins Moaner See your point about Eakins—she is indeed a good interviewer! But I’m still not fond of her music writing. All my joking about John Titor and time machines aside, I agree that shitcanning Pierce for what he did was kind of overkill. It's not like he was a cop falsifying police reports and because of his actions hundreds of convictions could be overturned...he was a guy who wrote a "It was pretty good," book review for a book he didn't read. As a journalist and occasional reviewer, I think he deserved it. Basic rule: if you're writing a review of a book, fucking read it. If you're going to say you like something, have a fucking reason. Anything less is at best false advertising, at worst outright lies. No, he wasn't a cop faking reports. But he was still faking. Someone pointed out in the comments of the Salman Rushdie review that there’s nothing in the review that’s not in the book’s press release. I would not be surprised if the book went unread.
|
|
Post-Lupin
Prolific Poster
Immanentizing the Eschaton
Posts: 5,673
|
Post by Post-Lupin on Sept 11, 2015 13:57:53 GMT -5
Judkins Moaner See your point about Eakins—she is indeed a good interviewer! But I’m still not fond of her music writing. As a journalist and occasional reviewer, I think he deserved it. Basic rule: if you're writing a review of a book, fucking read it. If you're going to say you like something, have a fucking reason. Anything less is at best false advertising, at worst outright lies. No, he wasn't a cop faking reports. But he was still faking. Someone pointed out in the comments of the Salman Rushdie review that there’s nothing in the review that’s not in the book’s press release. I would not be surprised if the book went unread. That's a sackin'!
|
|
|
Post by Logoboros on Sept 15, 2015 13:37:35 GMT -5
|
|
Creeper
TI Forumite
Draxx them sklounst
Posts: 984
|
Post by Creeper on Sept 18, 2015 19:37:31 GMT -5
when they killed my father That was a huge error in judgment, I agree. *makes shakey hand gesture* Ehhh
|
|
|
Post by disqusf3dme on Sept 18, 2015 19:52:02 GMT -5
I have to agree with Great Job, Internet! As it's been said, it can be good sometimes but not often enough. I also recently stumbled upon the Ghostbusters thing too, that was great. As a newer user it's always enjoyable to stumble upon pieces of AVC history like that. The music review of Lana Del Rey's album where the reviewer basically spent more time talking about how her album sucks because she positions herself as whatever contrived indie-pop gun moll/blow-up doll instead of, I don't know, actually critiquing if the album worked or not despite Del Rey's persona. Sounds like they went full Pitchfork. Never a good idea.
|
|
Ice Cream Planet
AV Clubber
I get glimpses of the horror of normalcy.
Posts: 3,833
|
Post by Ice Cream Planet on Sept 19, 2015 4:29:42 GMT -5
I have to agree with Great Job, Internet! As it's been said, it can be good sometimes but not often enough. I also recently stumbled upon the Ghostbusters thing too, that was great. As a newer user it's always enjoyable to stumble upon pieces of AVC history like that. The music review of Lana Del Rey's album where the reviewer basically spent more time talking about how her album sucks because she positions herself as whatever contrived indie-pop gun moll/blow-up doll instead of, I don't know, actually critiquing if the album worked or not despite Del Rey's persona. Sounds like they went full Pitchfork. Never a good idea. I know all forms of artistic criticism have tendencies toward know-it-all grandiosity, but that Pitchfork brand of music criticism is supremely annoying. Half of the time I'm left with the impression the reviewer doesn't even like music that much. I have nothing against a critic who wants to tear apart the creator as much as the work in question. To each their own. But, especially in the case of the Lana Del Rey debut album review, they could do better to hide their 'wait, some indie person may have a manufactured pop persona?!' attitude. I doubt they would go after Bob Dylan the same way.
|
|
Post-Lupin
Prolific Poster
Immanentizing the Eschaton
Posts: 5,673
|
Post by Post-Lupin on Sept 19, 2015 8:10:24 GMT -5
I have to agree with Great Job, Internet! As it's been said, it can be good sometimes but not often enough. I also recently stumbled upon the Ghostbusters thing too, that was great. As a newer user it's always enjoyable to stumble upon pieces of AVC history like that. Sounds like they went full Pitchfork. Never a good idea. I know all forms of artistic criticism have tendencies toward know-it-all grandiosity, but that Pitchfork brand of music criticism is supremely annoying. Half of the time I'm left with the impression the reviewer doesn't even like music that much. I have nothing against a critic who wants to tear apart the creator as much as the work in question. To each their own. But, especially in the case of the Lana Del Rey debut album review, they could do better to hide their 'wait, some indie person may have a manufactured pop persona?!' attitude. I doubt they would go after Bob Dylan the same way. Ooh, is it time to post the Doktor Sleepless authenticity rant again? Since I get so many reasons to repost this classic, I've made a blog page for both the text and the comic panels.
|
|
|
Post by ganews on Sept 22, 2015 9:44:53 GMT -5
I have to agree with Great Job, Internet! As it's been said, it can be good sometimes but not often enough. I also recently stumbled upon the Ghostbusters thing too, that was great. As a newer user it's always enjoyable to stumble upon pieces of AVC history like that. Sounds like they went full Pitchfork. Never a good idea. I know all forms of artistic criticism have tendencies toward know-it-all grandiosity, but that Pitchfork brand of music criticism is supremely annoying. Half of the time I'm left with the impression the reviewer doesn't even like music that much. I have nothing against a critic who wants to tear apart the creator as much as the work in question. To each their own. But, especially in the case of the Lana Del Rey debut album review, they could do better to hide their 'wait, some indie person may have a manufactured pop persona?!' attitude. I doubt they would go after Bob Dylan the same way. MAD Magazine, 1969:
|
|
Post-Lupin
Prolific Poster
Immanentizing the Eschaton
Posts: 5,673
|
Post by Post-Lupin on Sept 22, 2015 11:43:48 GMT -5
StarWipe.
|
|
|
Post by Judkins Moaner on Sept 22, 2015 20:54:32 GMT -5
Especially considering StarWipe's recent Rosemary's Baby-style creation, this is pretty small beer, but I just saw the Newswire "FX CEO says his shows are better than Netflix shows." That's not a story, that's a playground taunt. Seriously, all they need is the preceding "Oooooooooooh!"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2015 7:45:59 GMT -5
Especially considering StarWipe's recent Rosemary's Baby-style creation, this is pretty small beer, but I just saw the Newswire "FX CEO says his shows are better than Netflix shows." That's not a story, that's a playground taunt. Seriously, all they need is the preceding "Oooooooooooh!" It's all part of the apparent requirement that all newswire posts must be drenched in snark, even though it used to be mainly O'Neal's thing and nobody can do it like he does it. Now that the newswire is a variety of writers trying to snark at 110% power on most every topic, I find it sometimes a bit exhausting to read.
|
|
|
Post by swagonion on Sept 24, 2015 22:30:01 GMT -5
What puzzles me about the whole Leonard Pierce issue is, don't the writers get assignments? That is, didn't an editor or some higher-up person tell him to review that book? And if so, was that higher-up person aware that the book didn't exist? …Was it a trap? I can answer this without burning bridges! At that time, you just wrote to the Comics Panel editor to say you had comics you wanted to review in hand, and then you sent those reviews in on time. There was no real credibility check, to be honest. After it happened, they changed the procedure and tightened the ranks, making it more like the other sections. (Editor makes assignments, sends out review copy, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by swagonion on Sept 24, 2015 22:30:49 GMT -5
To be fair, they ditched TV Roundtable almost as soon as I left. I'm not surprised it's slid down the memory hole. There were a lot of TV features I was keeping alive through sheer force of will toward the end there.
|
|
Post-Lupin
Prolific Poster
Immanentizing the Eschaton
Posts: 5,673
|
Post by Post-Lupin on Sept 25, 2015 10:54:40 GMT -5
What puzzles me about the whole Leonard Pierce issue is, don't the writers get assignments? That is, didn't an editor or some higher-up person tell him to review that book? And if so, was that higher-up person aware that the book didn't exist? …Was it a trap? I can answer this without burning bridges! At that time, you just wrote to the Comics Panel editor to say you had comics you wanted to review in hand, and then you sent those reviews in on time. There was no real credibility check, to be honest. After it happened, they changed the procedure and tightened the ranks, making it more like the other sections. (Editor makes assignments, sends out review copy, etc.) So, Pierce straight-out lied that he had valid copy to file? This does not raise my opinion of him.
|
|
|
Post by Celebith on Sept 26, 2015 17:01:22 GMT -5
The original text for Verhoeven's The Fourth Man review. It's like all site editing :cease to exist. "A gleefully deranged and deviant fantasia of religious and carnal imagery, Paul Verhoeven’s The Fourth Man centers on the psychosexual crisis plaguing a writer played by Jeroen Krabbé. Director Paul Verhoeven’s writer. A man who states, “I lie the truth,” Krabbé is introduceds Krabbé naked and fantasizing about murdering his gay lover—, this after Verhoeven openings the film with the sight of a spider cocooning flies caught in its web, which in turn segues into visions of Christ on the cross. That mixture of perverse violence, predatory danger, and Catholic guilt comes to defines Krabbé’s saga once he journeys to southern Holland for a lecture, and where he meets falls in with icy, androgynous blonde Renée Soutendijk. Covering her breasts in bed to make her look more like a boy, Krabbé Covering her breasts in bed to make her look more like a boy, Krabbé falls in with Soutendijk. but However, he trulyactually pines for Soutendijk’s her hunky boy toy Thom Hoffman, whose sexual shortcomings se lack of stamina in the bedroom Krabbé promises to fix—mainly, it eventually turns out, —by attempting to seduce him in the mausoleum housing the cremated remains of Soutendijk’s three deceased husbands. Verhoeven and cinematographer Jan de Bont drench the twisted narrative in all manner of symbolic motifs, crafting a dreamlike atmosphere of paranoia, fear, and lust—themes the duo would revisit almost a decade later in Basic Instinct. That twisted narrative is drenched in all manner of symbolic motifs by Verhoeven, who—working with cinematographer Jan dDe Bont, who would go on to direct the Hollywood action movie Speed—crafts a dreamlike atmosphere of paranoia, fear, and lust. Panicked by the idea that Soutendijk is a black widow, and that he’s destined to be who intends to make him her fourth victim, Krabbé navigates a landscape where the where there are no boundaries betweenboundaries between reality and reality and nightmare :cease to exist. Allusions to Samson and Delilah mix freely with Krabbé’s hallucinations about eyeballs popping out of their oozing sockets, a red Speedo-clad Hoffman on the cross, and Soutendijk castrating him in bed with the same scissors she uses at her salon. Coupled with Krabbé’s deliriously over-the-top performance, the director’s and Verhoeven’s in-your-face approach renders the materialmake it all a jet-black comedy. Meanwhile, the appropriations of stylistic tropes from Buñuel, Hitchcock, and De Palma are merely another example of the film’s overriding prankster-ish humor."
|
|
|
Post by Celebith on Sept 26, 2015 17:13:26 GMT -5
I know all forms of artistic criticism have tendencies toward know-it-all grandiosity, but that Pitchfork brand of music criticism is supremely annoying. Half of the time I'm left with the impression the reviewer doesn't even like music that much. I have nothing against a critic who wants to tear apart the creator as much as the work in question. To each their own. But, especially in the case of the Lana Del Rey debut album review, they could do better to hide their 'wait, some indie person may have a manufactured pop persona?!' attitude. I doubt they would go after Bob Dylan the same way. Ooh, is it time to post the Doktor Sleepless authenticity rant again? Since I get so many reasons to repost this classic, I've made a blog page for both the text and the comic panels. Richey Manic is Fatman?!?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2015 8:59:40 GMT -5
The original text for Verhoeven's The Fourth Man review. It's like all site editing :cease to exist. I had completely forgotten about that. Clicking on that article and reading the insane madness spilling out across the screen was surreal, and one of the funniest things I'd ever stumbled across.
|
|
|
Post by Pastafarian on Sept 27, 2015 9:46:37 GMT -5
Especially considering StarWipe's recent Rosemary's Baby-style creation, this is pretty small beer, but I just saw the Newswire "FX CEO says his shows are better than Netflix shows." That's not a story, that's a playground taunt. Seriously, all they need is the preceding "Oooooooooooh!" It's all part of the apparent requirement that all newswire posts must be drenched in snark, even though it used to be mainly O'Neal's thing and nobody can do it like he does it. Now that the newswire is a variety of writers trying to snark at 110% power on most every topic, I find it sometimes a bit exhausting to read. I like a lot of his stuff, but even O'Neal's snark can get a little insufferable at times. And when the whole feature is nothing but snark all the way down, it's just so boring. It would be like watching Parks and Rec but with every single character replaced by an April Ludgate clone. Even Lil' Sebastian.
|
|
dLᵒ
Prolific Poster
𝓐𝓻𝓮 𝓦𝓮 𝓒𝓸𝓸𝓵 𝓨𝓮𝓽?
Posts: 4,533
|
Post by dLᵒ on Sept 27, 2015 12:16:44 GMT -5
There is no sound more horrible than a room full of people trying to out-snark one another. ? ? ?
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Lemur on Sept 27, 2015 14:30:13 GMT -5
Yuri Petrovitch I’d agree, though I don’t think it’s so much an issue with AVC articles as it is with the commenters. Whenever I visit it’s just a ton of bitter people lashing out about some injustice in the world or some new thing they’ve all decided to dislike (and the list of things is long, and usually filtered through some sort of inscrutable reverse-classism). It’s just no fun to go off-topic anymore: one usually ends up with an airing of grievances rather than irreverent humor. I mostly stick to community features, some of the reviews, the more interesting GJI’s (it’s easy to spot which will and won’t actually live up to the name), and Hear/Watch This, of all things, though the AVC now runs during my workday (not the evening, like when I was in Europe) so I’m not there as much anymore anyway. This happens pretty often now—I blew my top (and then edited it back on) when this happened with an article referencing the finale to the Henson Dinosaurs where the author linked back to a Buzzfeed gif-parade, not Noel Murray’s article. Noel Murray wrote about the exact thing you’re trying to reference! Noel Murray! On this site! You can get a few more pennies of ad revenue! And Noel Murray’s writing is good!
|
|