Thread 150176658

I don't watch shows made after 2016 because they are usually gay, woke and boring, but I have seen that some recent shows have been called "critically acclaimed" from reading reviews (or looking on wikipedia). Is this phrase overused, or are these shows that good? I would think that a critically acclaimed show would be near timeless, like the first seasons of Simpsons, Game of thrones, Twin peaks, South Park, Duckman, etc. Here is a random list of shows that are "Critically Acclaimed"
>Big Mouth
>Castlevania Nocturne
>Bojack Horseman
>Arcane
>She-Ra and the Princesses of Power
>Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts

Am I to believe that these shows are as close to or are the perfection of the art? Are they really incredible shows that demand some attention? I just find it interesting that there are so many shows that are described as critically acclaimed, yet have no cultural impact, or even any minor impact on social sites. Or is it all part of the whole ecosystem of paid reviewers/shills who approve of nearly all slop for the unknowing audience?
Does /co/ feel the same way?

>>150176658 (OP)
>woke
Define "woke". I want a real definition that I can use to point to a show and say "that's woke" or " that's not woke".

it's just a marketing term used to buy your interest. reviews can be bought, they're cheap

you can have a low seventy on RT and still technically be critically acclaimed

>>150176658 (OP)
Critically acclaimed doesn't mean 'the best of the best.'
It just means that critics liked it. It's like the New York Times bestseller award, it just means that a bunch of people in New York bought it, it doesn't mean anything.

>>150176690

"Woke" originated from being "awake" and aware to social injustices, primarily how blacks were being treated by cops, i.e BLM verbiage.

The problem with being "woke", is that this mindset pushes the individual to spot social injustices, rather than providing solutions. There is some jap proverb "If all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail". This is why we are hearing that everything is problematic now. Facts, biology, statistics, even bringing up the coroners notes from george floyds death is seen as problematic.

Now, this is why "woke " is a pejorative. Because now, we see companies and people over compensate, and aggressively respond in insincere attempts to try and virtue signal to minorities. For example, this is usually done by white people saying they hate white people because of white guilt (if you read kotaku, it's basically every other article), or companies/movie studios black washing, gaywashing, or aggressively inserting diversity that is obviously a form of pandering.
So yes blackwashing, gaywashing,and aggressively inserting minorities into a setting where they normally did not exist (i.e bmw with heated seating), over-representing, are examples of being woke.

So, to define woke in one sentence
>To virtue-signal in an attempt to gratify certain groups of people the western world has deemed marginalized.

>I want a real definition that I can use to point to a show and say "that's woke" or " that's not woke".
The recent Castlevania show, from what I heard has black people (despite Hammer being the only back person in a Castlevania game which ironically is set in the future) and has alucard gay and getting fucked in the ass.

Do you want any more examples?

>>150176658 (OP)
I don't even trust fans. I loved The Flash movie and because some YouTubers like the furfag YMS nitpicked it and brought up the Ezra Miller drama it's somehow the status quo to hate it.

>>150176658 (OP)
The Star Wars Sequel Trilogy has been a complete utter disaster while the Prequel Trilogy spawn a lot of toys, games, books, and tv shows.

>>150176658 (OP)
Smiling Friends sucks.

>>150176809
I don't think Smiling Friends is critically acclaimed. It just has a zoomer following.

>>150176761
Not him, but without an explicit explanation from a creator, how can you be sure its virtue signalling to gratify certain marginalized groups? I have heard a similar definition of woke, but without the pejorative implication, just that it is to be aware of injustices.

Arcane for instance, has black and gay people in a fantasy/scifi setting. Does that mean its woke? The black people aren't from africa, because africa doesn't exist, so is it still trying to gratify marginalized african-americans? There is a lesbian couple, but is it to gratify gays or is it because of jokes made from jokes from the games playerbase? (vi calls caitlyn cupcake because she uses cupcake themed traps, and they are partners because you know... cops.)

Even if a creator does say that a thing was made to gratify certain groups, how can you be sure they aren't lying? Furthermore, these big shows aren't made by one person, even if you did believe everything one of the creators said to be true, and not something to get black people to watch after the fact, or to stir up shit online for free publicity or whatever, how many people have to say it for it to be true?

If a janitor or extra that worked on the show said they made a character gay or a villain straight because of woke reasons or whatever, is that the truth? What if there is a difference of opinion, whose matters more? The director? The characters voice actor? The creator of the IP?

Or does none of it matter because the internet has brainrotten people into thinking content with anything other than straight white characters has an agenda that (you) can't stop thinking about for long enough to enjoy a show?

>>150177117
I would have also like add to what you said with a 'Why does it matter?'
Isn't the problem that they go broke? Okay, then let them.

>>150177117
>how can you be sure its virtue signalling to gratify certain marginalized groups?
Because it is normally explicitly stated.
exhibit A: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_the_Dragon#Changes_from_the_novels

>Arcane for instance, has black and gay people in a fantasy/scifi setting. Does that mean its woke?
Nope, if it's original, then it's fine. It's the fact that when a show is not faithful to the source material, then that's a problem.

>Even if a creator does say that a thing was made to gratify certain groups, how can you be sure they aren't lying?
Money talks. I doubt the creator of Percy Jackson was thrilled when Disney did the casting, but he has that disney $$$ now.

>Or does none of it matter because the internet has brainrotten people into thinking content with anything other than straight white characters has an agenda that (you) can't stop thinking about for long enough to enjoy a show?

It matters to someone if the changes were made to an established character.

>>150177294
>members of House Velaryon are generally described as having "silver-gold hair, pale skin, and violet eyes"
>However, Condal and Sapochnik wanted to introduce more racial diversity with its casting.
>As a result, House Velaryon are portrayed as black in the television series

You fell for it. Lol. Lmao. Custom purple contacts and shit for everyone from this house costs money. Instead they just hire black actors, claim its for woke, get possible woke viewers, and get people like you to drum up free publicity online. To borrow what you have said... Money talks.

Also my stepdads cousins friends uncle worked as an extra on that show and said that this is true, so you gotta believe him.

>It's the fact that when a show is not faithful to the source material, then that's a problem.
Then just say that. Don't call it woke because its honestly a meaningless phrase. Pointing out something isn't faithful to the source material (and then also pointing out how the source material is *better*) has real value and meaning that you can explain to another person.

>>150177294
If it's not for the sake of historisity, then it really doesn't matter. It's all made up shit.

>>150176658 (OP)
What the hell is going on in that pic?

>>150177622
Well she is Asian, so you can assume that it will be some sort of bodily fluid going into that funnel.

>>150176658 (OP)
they're not perfect, but better than your average cartoon writing wise and animation wise.

you might not like them because they're left-leaning, but none of them were safe censored toy commercial nor low effort animated sitcoms. They remain timeless because no one is going to copy their premise

>>150176658 (OP)
>Big Mouth
really? i remember people memeing on it pretty hard.

>Castlevania Nocturne
haven't seen it but i liked the original series.

>Bojack Horseman
never saw

>Arcane
don't care for LoL, didn't watch.


>She-Ra and the Princesses of Power
my favorite part about the new she-ra is all the culture warriors coming out of the woodwork from both sides pretending they actually cared about the character only to immediately disappear once the show came out and just flew under the radar.

>>Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts
never saw.

my problem with modern TV is the serialization of it all. if i wanted to watch a movie stretched out into 15-26 half hour episodes then i'd just watch a fucking movie.

>>150176658 (OP)
>>150176761
>>150177117
>>150177294
>I don't watch shows made after 2016 because they are usually gay, woke and boring.
woke is more of a symptom than a cause of why something sucks. if you remove the stuff that makes a thing "woke" it's not going to magically make that thing good.

>the internet has brainrotten people into thinking content with anything other than straight white characters has an agenda that (you) can't stop thinking about for long enough to enjoy a show?
political brainrot is a mental illness and the politicization of apolitical spaces & hobbies hasn't helped with that.

hearing people say that shit like x-men (where mutants are an allegory for the civil rights movement and later LGBT) and star trek (a sci-fi series about a socialist's utopian vision of the future) being called "woke" now is the surrealist shit to me even when hearing it from diehard/hardcore fans.

>>150176658 (OP)
Most content reviewers nowadays are women and fags, so of course they have shit tastes compared to classic critics.

>>150176658 (OP)
You absolutely shouldn't read anything under "Reception" on Wikipedia.
>>150178666
>my favorite part about the new she-ra is all the culture warriors coming out of the woodwork from both sides pretending they actually cared about the character only to immediately disappear once the show came out and just flew under the radar.
Revelation made me appreciate nu-She-Ra way more than it deserves, but it's still not worth recommending despite being decently written for the most part. Faggot shit for faggots is too faggy for a non-faggot.

>>150176658 (OP)
I really need to know what was happening in this Captain Planet episode.

>"Critically Acclaimed"
>Castlevania Nocturne
By wom'stve?
Even people I know who liked the original Castlevania Netflix run shat on this.

>>150176761
So, every movie about MLK is woke?

>>150176658 (OP)

My opinion is that I have never read a cartoon review in my life and never will. I cannot comment on "critically acclaimed" shows because I don't know or care what critics say about cartoons. I recommend you learn to form your own opinions and spit on critics; their minds are not better than yours.

>>150180429
Yes. Anything related to mlk these days is not about the man and his life, but using him as an example to push a message.

>>150176658 (OP)
"Critically acclaimed" is for shows that weren't good enough to call themselves "Emmy nominated"

>>150176690
For me, anything that has identity politics in it. Gender, race, migrants, etc. If it involves identity, its woke. I don't care much for climate change or the environment or whatever but identity politics is what defines woke.

>>150176658 (OP)
Critics are journalists, and no one hates journalists enough.

>>150176658 (OP)
source

>>150180531
>these days
No, everything.
You can't find an objective difference between now and then. The message is the same now as it was then.

>>150176658 (OP)
Only read like two sentences of your post, then realized you're a fucking idiot retard.

Op is a fucking baby and a degenerate chud

>>150180598
And what do you mean identity politics? Do you just hate anything with gay people (I say that because "woke" is almost universally used as a negative descriptor on the same level as "shit" "dull" and "directed by Zack Snyder/Michael Bay"), or is it about presentation? Are you find with gay people as long as they don't say or do anything gay? Is a gay romance story that's not woke just impossible to make?

Gay people will always exist

>>150180823
Why are you talking to this idiot like he formed an intelligent thought? They're probably not even real.

>>150176658 (OP)
If people love it, I hate it.

>>150181364
Attention seeking child behavior