Criticism on Simplistic Entertainment
I caught up with Nathan this week to discuss The Walking Dead a bit, but more specifically criticism on entertainment mediums that are simplistic in nature.
Nathan: I had no clue the walking dead started back last week!
Joshua: Yeah it did. I haven’t watched it yet either. I just heard something interesting happened.
Nathan: What’d you hear?
Joshua: I didn’t click on the links. Didn’t want it to be spoiled.
Nathan: Smart. I did see one article talking about how horrible it was. Seems like everyone has a hot take about twd these days.
Joshua: Which I get because it’s the most popular show on tv probably. But at the same time critics just need to hop off and stop discussing it. If you’re out on the show, then be out on it. Some keep writing and talking about it even though they hate it. Which I don’t get. I guess you love to hate something sometimes. What I have a hard time understanding is habitual critiquing of one entity.
Nathan: Yeah I agree with that. At some point you just have to let the show be what it is. I’ve embraced TWD, so I have to watch it until the end. It’s not Mr. Robot or Fargo as far as how compelling it is, but it’s created something kinda fun that I wanna keep watching.
At some point critics have to give up on hating it. There’s no point. Every show serves a purpose. This show isn’t making political statements or curing cancer, it’s about zombies, ethical dilemmas, the human condition, and surviving. It’s not complicated, and that’s okay. It’s the same thing with shows like Black List. I will never watch that show, but my parents love watch James Spader kill a bad guy every week. It’s not compelling to me, but it serves a purpose.
Joshua: Exactly, and like Blacklist and the Walking Dead, there some shows that are what they are. They aren’t going to adapt to culture or adapt to become better shows. Zombies and murder mysteries are a seemingly a staple of entertainment and there are a decent amount of people who enjoy each for what they simply are and nothing more.
A good parallel may be critiquing Fast and Furious. I’ll never get people who continually critique that movie series over and over again. It is what it is. Ridiculous chase scenes and one liners. Some people, including myself, enjoy it for the simplicity and ridiculousness that it is.
Nathan: I agree with you on that too. When you mentioned Fast and Furious, I thought of Mad Max. It’s not the kind of movie where we need to dissect the narrative, or determine why we care about these characters. I don’t have to watch that movie and guess what the director and writer are doing. It’s fairly straight forward stuff. Some movies or shows aren’t created to tell a story that resonates. Maybe we want them to, and are dissatisfied when they don’t, but maybe that’s the consumer’s problem, not the creator’s.
Joshua: The odd thing about you mentioning mad max is that it is up for best picture at the Oscars. I thought it was a really interesting movie, but if you look at the guts of it, it is basically fast and furious going in an apocalyptic world.
I agree with the second part of your statement as well. Some movies are simply entertainment. Some can sit down and enjoy a Fast and Furious, Mad Max, or James Bond. Maybe others just can’t watch and enjoy something that isn’t deeply engrained a story with interesting narrative.
