Axx°N N. wrote:
Better etiquette could go a long way. But I don't think anyone who has a negative view is saying they won't watch the film or anything, I think everyone is just as eager to see the film regardless, and realize that they haven't experienced a full appreciation whether it be negative or positive.
I think the same-however, I still consider there to be a certain amount of "our opinions are already as valid as those of the people who've seen the film." Agree to disagree, I guess.
Well I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that.
You don't have to argue for something to still unknowingly support it. And I'm not advocating for suspending analysis-apologies if I came across as saying that. (Then again, seeing as most people ignore my posts and continue on, it's not like I'd be succeeding anyway, would I?) I just consider the very notion that it's possible to engage in deep critical conversation about the pluses and minuses of something that one has not actually consumed simply because of some knowledge about the thing and parts of its sum something that inevitably gets close to a view that one does not actually need to truly consume artworks as long as one knows enough about them. Considering that I've hardly seen anyone consistently say stuff like "I think" and "In my view", while things like certainty in opinions are rather abundant makes it seem to me like one could look at this thread, at both the positive and negative receptions of a film that are rather certain and stated by people who have not actually seen it, and come away with a reasonable view that "consumption" is not necessary for "understanding".
Regardless of whether or not you think that you still need to watch Shin, there is nothing in this kind of behavior to say that anyone who criticizes NTE despite never having seen more than maybe one hour of the whole thing and a couple of critical videos, read the entire dialogue, seen some pictures and knowing the detailed plot outline etc., is wrong-as a matter of fact, even though it'd still be considered better to watch the thing, it'd still be fine to criticize it and act as if the criticisms are really valid. And, once again, this goes for the overly sure positive receptions too.
I wouldn't have as much of a problem if people were to say "Well, I haven't seen the film, but this comes off a bit weird/awesome" instead of "This is weird/awesome". It's not like I don't have questions about Mari's role or the meaning of the ending or Shinji seemingly choosing what's best for Asuka without asking her or what's up with the ending for Gendo and Yui or whatever. It's not like I like the fan service elements I can see, for that matter. I'm not someone who doesn't have questions. I'm just someone who thinks it's weird to not wait for the answers and think that what we have right now is enough to make up for them.
Zizek for instance has a well-known statement where he says that while V for Vendetta is compelling, he wishes he could see what a theoretical V for Vendetta Pt. II would consist of
OOC, did he talk about the book or the movie? I can agree if it's about the movie, but the comic ends very deliberately on an ambiguous note and, uh, a lonely man walking down a desolate motorway while chaos reigns-Moore explicitly wanted to make something that forces people to think and doesn't have easy-going answers (the fact that the comic is far more about anarchy and fascism than liberal democracy and Bush-era conservatism should make that clear). Even if it can be used for "pornographic titillation", it can only be done in the way as NGE can be used for the same-by misunderstanding or ignoring a big part of the work's themes.