|
I voted: 'someone who frequently finds fault or makes harsh and unfair judgments'.
Because this is how majority of so called 'anime critics' are nowadays. The critics nowadays are complainers and people who don't understand much. Because they don't understand what they're watching, they don't even know what they're talking about, and because of that, they are complaining of something that doesn't even exist, thus harsh and unfair.
"I don't understand why", "I don't get how", "I have no idea how this can happen".
Yes, obviously the 'critic' himself failed to understand certain points that the show itself has presented and others can understand, he calls it criticism.
Then there's this group who thinks what he's looking at is 'crap', because he doesn't appreciate the style, the art, the animation, a certain voice actor(s). He thinks the show is crap and criticises because it has something he himself doesn't like. A 'critic' who doesn't know how to appreciate the rest of what is good, or simply doesn't understand what is taste.
And for the critics who think they're good, simply because they know how to argue, because they know some debating terms and have a good command of the English language.
My advice to them is to learn and have a decent command of the Japanese language first before claiming that they are actually good 'Anime critics'. Alot of critics simply have no idea what they really are watching because they do not have a full idea of what is expressed in Japanese, fansubs do not compensate for the loss in translation.
Also if you're criticising something in a western perspective, your criticism is already flawed in the first place. In many instances, anime are created by Japanese for Japanese audiences, they are not designed to appeal to Western audience in a completely Western perspective. Understand some Japanese language and culture before you actually criticise some joke, some philosophy and stuff that your Western mind can't accept.
|