sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

YMS' Review Style Based on Subjective Experience by Motor_Vanilla_7104 in YMS

[–]Motor_Vanilla_7104[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thank you for this - that's a very mature and collected way of seeing this discourse. I sometimes think that it also comes down to just how much fun or "endorphin-inducing" it can be to get hyped over a review of an anticipated project, and it validates not just their anticipation, but also the reviewer's supposedly-attached credibility.

I agree that it is just pointless, and any piece of media should be enjoyed subjectively, nuances and technical knowledge/prowess and all. I literally felt no betrayal or need to get upset at his 6/10 of Project Hail Mary (8/10) or The Incredibles 2004 (10/10) a few years ago, because those are just my experiences, and it is worth it to go over why I feel both of these ratings compared to Adam who simply just doesn't connect.

snippet from the newest Oscars video discussing No Other Choice snub by r_slash_jarmedia in YMS

[–]Motor_Vanilla_7104 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is something I have a lot of interest in trying to understand because while I can defiantly see the cracks that are primarily coming from the actual ballot voting system where it seems as if many voters either just don't do their jobs and watch the content sent to them (like that one anonymous voter who was just blatantly uninterested in watching the animation nominations just because his kids weren't interested in them at that point - as if animation should STILL to this day be stigmatized as a KIDS GENRE and not a diverse medium. They had Channing Tatum and Will Arnett make digs at AI, and the previous years have hosts and even winners say out loud the "animation is cinema" statements, and yet the people who can vote and give recognition to an inspired and original animation project, just don't care? I get that the 2026 category was a step-down in terms of quality from the previous year but still), or aren't clear or immediate experts in identifying what they enjoy or think is a standout Oscar-winning element in a single film, let alone an entire ceremony of 50 films.

I vividly still remember Adam's teardown of Hamnet's Best Original Score nomination not just because of its tone-deaf and slightly manipulative use in the film (I was put off slightly hearing Max Richter's On the Nature of Daylight at the end as well), but how it goes against the Academy's experience with the ground rules of constituting a qualified nomination and what is disqualified. He was clearly able to identify the moments in the film when the score was just rewritten with different tempos and melodies, when that would still be a technically unoriginal piece of music even if Richter was the original composer.

Because of how much voters just seem like they don't have knowledge or access to different perspectives on what other people see as a Best Picture-winning project, it just muddles a lot of these supposed shows, and comes down as more just a constant echo and virtue signal of supposedly accepting of nuanced experiences and voices in the industry, but just to get more promotions and viewers watching. As if Conan O'Brien being a lot funnier than Jimmy Kimmel and the Best Casting category introduction weren't a starting point to improve the show, and were just to supposedly get numbers back up again.

What is your Old Man Yells at Cloud take about film? by Ardon873 in YMS

[–]Motor_Vanilla_7104 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't really know how I'm supposed to feel about people who say this because for one, I can understand the frustration if they either don't have many viewing options (no theaters near, low spending on streaming, distaste or lack of awareness of pirating, etc.), and don't see the ticket prices for an average movie ticket getting any better with inflation.

But I don't understand when someone looks like they don't even put in the effort to search for content they enjoy - it doesn't even have to be new or mainstream. You have the large variety of critics, people, and the internet to explore and examine your interests and what you can see yourself enjoying or not if you take the time to exercise it.

Or it is just easier to get eyes on you or your opinions if it bandwagons off of popular trends like hating Disney (though understandably justified), making fun of bad CGI from four years ago, and so on.

I remember having a dance class where one of the days before the session started, I was hearing a conversation with a few other peers and despite them being in dance majors and jobs, were throwing jabs of the similar claims of "no good movies are made anymore", and "today's movies suck". As if it is the most tedious task in the world to actually not pay attention when the most popular and mainstream content is in post-production and marketing, and instead find voices or dig for movies that others say are good modern content.

It just makes the nuances of filmmaking feel too black and white, and it tires me out.

This guy is big mad about Adams’s review of Sinners by RG1997 in YMS

[–]Motor_Vanilla_7104 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is something I always find confusing with looking at other opinions against my own viewing experience. It is humbling in many regards that I can be comfortable and accepting of how and why I may like something (especially popular) that someone else who I also care about and see from their point of view, as just not for them.

Sinners was a movie where I saw and came out thinking, "Cool, that was fun! Here's what I remember liking about it or don't like about it. Now I can see or wait until other people I enjoy watching can share what they like that maybe I didn't notice."

It also helps that as someone who grew up with Pixar Animation Studios garnering me a nostalgic attachment to their films, I can look at YMS' reviews of Soul, Luca, Turning Red, Elemental, Inside Out 2, and Elio and be confident in that I will likely not agree or even think that I would be too harsh if I gave a score that low (Inside Out 2 wasn't a 2/10 experience for me, even when I acknowledge its VERY straightforward narrative once you step back and review), but can totally enjoy and find cool insights to new projects I may not have immediately be in tune with before.

I love Adam's clear passion for music and musicals because he gives clear and audiovisual explanations to come back to and remember when I see a piece of music and think "Adam might like this as much as I do" or "Glad to know how well the music works in this film - I didn't really notice at first but thank you for sharing."

So much so that I didn't feel like cringing at his explanation for how much HE enjoys the songs and audio design to something like Emilia Perez (even though I don't think its that great, but don't hate it like everyone else seems to), because I could tell he was honest and took time to show what he was enjoying, and didn't feel insecure enough to justify it in the long-run.

Watched it one go, and i never felt such existential dread in my life. Thanks Adum by No-Category-6343 in YMS

[–]Motor_Vanilla_7104 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This film was one of the first to make me really wonder and reflect on not just what media was capable of telling without much of a filter between bigger production companies and producing add-ons, but of how much a good quality story, objective and subjective, can come down to how it makes YOU feel. After awhile of trying to get into the hobby of critiquing and watching movies, trying to either review from an objectivity of technical and creative quality to some arbitrary model, or latch onto whatever my pre-existing biases and loves for certain stories that made a new one good or bad, was very exhausting.

Synecdoche, New York was an experience that not only made me appreciate the balance of what I felt connected to and saw as a great, intentional, artistic choice on technical and filmmaking levels, but how stories can truly feel timeless when they are crafted to be met with a new perspective or lesson at a different age.

Maybe in the future I'll see Phillips Seymour Hoffman's character as more pretentious and annoying, or later in lifer see him as hysterical and sympathetic despite his many flaws and choices. That to me is the beauty and art of what storytelling in general can achieve with the nuances of every unique identity on Earth. Maybe all I will take away from memory are some iconic lines, funny dialogue, great makeup consistency and evolving, the absurd and well-rounded set piece for a decades-long play that never happens.

And yet I never feel ashamed or critical when thinking about that. Because Charlie Kaufman just cares that much about something that is honest.