Unpopular opinions go here

[overgeeked]

I used to rate movies on a scale of 1-5. But I thought it was stupid trying to come up with a sliding scale so instead just started using a thumbs up. Is this movie worth watching? Then it gets a thumbs up.

For me, there’s only three relevant questions. Did I like it? Would I watch it again? And would I recommend it to others?

 

[overgeeked]

It’s okay to like problematic stuff as long as you can recognize the problematic elements and not get defensive or become an apologist for those problematic elements.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It’s okay to like problematic stuff as long as you can recognize the problematic elements and not get defensive or become an apologist for those problematic elements.

I deeply wish this wasn't an unpopular opinion.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I don't fall asleep during movies, but I often hit pause and se if there's a plot description on Wiki. Read that, delete the movie from my list, and go on. I'm still ten+ years in my viewing, so I haven't even dented my lists. The Hollywood strikes could last forever; I've just discovered Mike & Molly, and Malcom in the Middle.

 

[Gradine]

It’s okay to like problematic stuff as long as you can recognize the problematic elements and not get defensive or become an apologist for those problematic elements.

I've swung back and forth on this a lot over the years, but yeah, there are a lot of people with whom I otherwise agree with on most things who just can't seem to be okay with just liking things. Like, let people enjoy things.

There's definitely nuance in the areas between "liking problematic stuff" and "supporting literal real-world villains" but there's only so much power in individual level consumer decisions.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

The only three books you need to play a years long Shadowrun campaign are the original Seattle Sourcebook, Shadowbeat, and Sprawlsites.

There's one more thing: a half decent rules set.

I believe it was in the adaptation of Earthsea that they swapped the main character’s username and Truename- probably because the latter sounded “cooler”.

13 year old me: Sparrowhawk is the coolest name ever! Ged? Ged is.. okay, I guess. Also 53 year old me.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Have you read his review? Because I don't think it's the problem. He opens up by saying he was disappointed by the superficial characterizations and the implausible actions of the characters. Did he watch the same movie the rest of us watched? I re-watched it just a few years ago, and I didn't find anyone's behavior to be implausible.

No. It was just a general note I've observed about most critics talking about horror movies.

 

[jdrakeh]

There's one more thing: a half decent rules set.

It's my belief that any old ruleset will do if you're willing to put in the work (some require much less than others, obviously). I wouldn't say that any particular rules set is required, though, which is why none made my list.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

It's my belief that any old ruleset will do if you're willing to put in the work (some require much less than others, obviously). I wouldn't say that any particular rules set is required, though, which is why none made my list.

Truth.

I managed to run a multi-year campaign with SR 1st ed. It was so tantalisingly close to being a good system. I love the way the system handled things like like drain, astral projection, elementals and nature spirits, spell focuses. Actually, I liked all the magical stuff. The net running was cool and flavourful. I liked the initiative system, but accept that it it caused issues. By which I mean reflexes were king and if you didn't have them, you were dead.

There's HERO rules called Shadowpunk. I've read them but not played. I've heard they don't work very well.

Sorry, I'm turning this into the RPG Heartbreaker thread.

 

[overgeeked]

I've swung back and forth on this a lot over the years, but yeah, there are a lot of people with whom I otherwise agree with on most things who just can't seem to be okay with just liking things. Like, let people enjoy things.

There's definitely nuance in the areas between "liking problematic stuff" and "supporting literal real-world villains" but there's only so much power in individual level consumer decisions.

Absolutely a lot of nuance. But for me the line is actively causing or able to actively cause harm. That and literal Nazis.

If the author is dead, they can't actively harm anyone with whatever money I spend on their stuff. If the author is alive, then they can actively harm people with whatever money I spend...so I don't. At least not directly. Libraries still pay for books. When old copies wear out, they buy new ones...so checking out their work from the library still funds them. But buying second hand doesn't. So that's where I go.

The big places this pops up for me is Lovecraft, the OSR, and anime/manga/etc.

I love H.P. Lovecraft's writing, despite the fact that he was a virulent racist even for his time. But he's been dead and gone for a long time. Me buying his books isn't going to cause harm to anyone.

Unfortunately, there are some literal Nazis in the OSR scene, so, despite loving the aesthetic, I have to be hyper-vigilant about giving my money to people in that arena. And there are way too many people who use "there's only so much I can do" as an excuse to give a pass to literal real-world villains. That's where the "defending and becoming an apologist" came from. There's way, way, way too much of that in the OSR.

I recently dove head first into the anime, manga, and light novel series Mushoku Tensei. I got that the MC was an absolute creep from the start...but apparently he gets worse as the story goes on and the author goes to some really dark places later in the story and has even recently defended some of the incredibly problematic elements of the story. I still love the thing and I'll still read it. But I'm switching up from buying the light novels new to buying them used.