In today’s media landscape, it’s not uncommon to see individuals on platforms like YouTube expressing unsolicited opinions about various topics. This phenomenon has been persistent, particularly among certain male commentators who dismiss media as being “not intended for their audience” yet continue to critique it. The question arises: Why engage in this negativity at all?
These commentators often resort to aggression, attacking anyone who diverges from their viewpoints, thus stifling a genuine appreciation for diverse media experiences. They create a hostile environment for fans—recently, many have targeted those who appreciate titles like The Acolyte or, more recently, the film Wicked.
Understanding the Critique of Wicked
Before diving deeper, let’s clarify: I fully acknowledge that men can and do enjoy Wicked. My critique specifically targets those who predictably dislike it yet choose to vocalize their disdain for sport. A case in point is the YouTuber known as the Critical Drinker.
His recent installment, titled “Wicked – I Can’t Believe I’m Reviewing This Movie,” unwittingly showcases a rather favorable review, albeit littered with caveats. He opens by the mentioning his initial snark directed at Cynthia Erivo, setting a tone of reluctant admiration for the film.
Despite acknowledging that the film is “pretty entertaining for what it is,”the Critical Drinker’s rhetoric often twists honest appreciation into a trap, making it difficult for viewers to validate their enjoyment of the film without experiencing his sarcastic commentary.
Maybe you could just not… nobody’s forcing you to. Paying to see a movie you knew you were going to hate is a waste of time.
pic.twitter.com/NR2WacHLh7— Maximus Decimus Meridius (@Cambergh02C) November 30, 2024
Missing the Mark on Wicked’s Messaging
A common critique of these YouTube personalities is their failure to grasp the central messages conveyed by the media they review. For instance, Wicked resonates deeply with political sentiments from the George W. Bush era, which the Critical Drinker dismisses as lacking explicitness in its messaging.
To bolster his argument, he draws comparisons to other films, like Barbie, seemingly searching for validation for his contradictory views on Wicked. This brings us to a crucial inquiry: Should every movie need to prove its worth to be enjoyed?
Engaging in film criticism where films are subjected to rigorous scrutiny can feel counterproductive. This video serves as a reminder that not every film merits a review, especially when the conclusion boils down to: If you like it, you’ll like it—otherwise, move on.
Embracing the Simplicity of Enjoyment
While it’s somewhat delightful to see someone like the Critical Drinker engage with and appreciate a film like Wicked, his commentary often misses the point of simply enjoying art without an agenda. There’s no requirement for everyone to express an opinion on a piece of media, particularly if it culminates in a lukewarm critique.
His final takeaway—if you like it, great; if not, find something else—rarely counts as constructive criticism. Moreover, while film critique thrives on contrarian views, feigning an unexpected fondness for a musical one aimed to scorn is disingenuous.
Ultimately, his review undermines the talent of artists like Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo, revealing a pattern of mocking that runs through his commentary. We currently exist in a culture where talking about everything feels obligatory, yet this isn’t necessary. Even passionate movie lovers can choose when to remain silent.
For the next wave of commentators who find themselves bewildered by reviewing films they initially intended to criticize, perhaps a better approach would be to forgo posting reviews altogether—especially when relying on questionable footage only to miss the essence of the material they critique.
Leave a Reply