💾 Archived View for idiomdrottning.org › two-kinds-of-reviews captured on 2024-08-25 at 01:09:17. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2024-08-18)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I feel like if the purpose of a review is to serve as a guide for which movies to watch, which books to read, which games to play, they need to tread carefully with spoilers. I usually don’t like writing these beyond a “I liked this one” or “I was a li’l disappointed in that one”.
There is another type of review that discusses all aspects of the work, including endings and twists, not for the presumtive “do I wanna watch this” audience but for the purposes of creators of future works. So they can know what worked and what didn’t. And for non-creators (I know, I know, "those who can't, teach") who are just curious about literature study and aesthetic philsosophy.
I love writing that kind of review. I always feel a li’l embarrassed and self-conscious when I try to, though. Like, “who am I to say that a particular actor’s performance was good when I can’t act? A painting was beautiful when mine are so grotesque?” That’s the sort of shame and doubt that comes like birds in spring when I put pen to paper about this stuff.
But it’s just a way for me to sort out my thoughts on something, help sublimate it, help remember it, help deal with it, and... I’m also in an environment where I get a lot of flak for liking stuff other people hate and vice versa so I feel a li’l more sane at least in my own mind’s eye if I can justify my thoughts about a work like this.