Patterns I Notice In (Male) Reviewers of Childrens Media
You know, I've started to notice something.
I've been watching a lot of movie reviews lately, not limited to children's movies but still a lot of children's movies as obviously children's literature is my main focus as a writer.
Remember how in my post where I talked about how Ruby Gillman showed some of the wrongs in children's media today and I had a back and forth in the comment section with someone who pretty much slammed Ruby as bad but as we talked more and more they ended up being like, "It's just not my cup of tea," as I pointed out his/her core issues with the movie was just personal opinions?
These past months, I became a bit more familiar with reviewers who will just claim a movie is bad if it doesn't comes with profound philosophy and/or not their cup of tea and I actually noticed a pattern.
In regards to the people who use their real voices in YouTube videos or the authors listed in review articles, its mostly men who will downright claim a piece of fiction is terrible based on their opinion instead of wether the story is approaching subject matters in a harmful manner, etc. I barely see any women acting like 'I hated this movie, so should everyone else'.
An obvious example that comes to mind, is Monsters vs Aliens.
To me, it's not a masterpiece either and there were definitely a writing decision or two that was made poorly. However, I don't think it has earnt the label of bad or terrible whilst I've heard/seen multiple men call this movie as such.
On an entertainment level of value, does it entertain kids? Yes. As a kid I thought it was okay at its worst, good at its best moments.
Does it have a harmful message or premise? No.
Are the minor storybeats problematic or unrealistic? No. In fact, Derek breaking of their engagement not only mirrors insecure men threatened by more powerful women but it also mirrors some of the douchebags people who developped a terminal illness or disability have dated. Because of the many ship edits, I know not a lot of people actually know the story behind Arcade, the Eurovision hit by Duncan Laurence.
In ship edits, this song often gets used for tragic ships or doomed star crossed lovers, but it's actually about having wasted everything for a relationships that is not worth it and that is the key part of the song people always miss. You see, the story behind the song is this;
Duncan Laurance had a friend who was diagnosed with cancer and she had no chance for recovery. Her boyfriend, rather then being there for her in her final moments, broke up with her and she spent her final days, lovesick on her deathbed waiting for him to come back but he never did. Duncan wrote the song in her memory but also to be a cautionary tale for himself, to never become the idiot wasting their final moments on a asshole who left you to die with a broken heart!
Susan and Derek reminds me of that story, because men like Derek would have also left Susan if he found out she was terminally ill or got into an accident that left her disabled.
So the movie's storytelling isn't downright terrible by any means and the animation is also decent. But again, I've heard multiple men take a dump on this movie for being trash.
I'll admit my brain is too foggy to remember how well the other monsters were written but considering the main story rested on Susan's shoulders and that was told acceptable enough and they gave her the self-acceptance she needed, how well they are fleshed out isn't too much of a deciding factor wether its good, okay or bad when it comes to stories aimed at younger children.
How well characters outside of the protagonist are developped and how important that is to the overall story really depends on the age demographic as well as the kind of story at hand. The more characters a child is meant to empathize for and follow their direction during the story, the more difficult it is to grasp for the really young ones. Small kids prefer having one fleshed out protagonist with a weaker cast over every character having a deeply developped backstory. Flat side characters are a thing in children's media for a reason.
Shows have a somewhat unique position for their ability to flesh out the characters because they have way more time to tell the story so they can easily create a filler episode where a background character shines even if its meant for a way younger audience and it also has the option to have the characters grow and become semi-fleshed out alongside the viewer if the show gets popular enough for a long-run.
In the case of a slightly older kid demographic, this can lead to fully fleshed out masterpieces like ATLA, though not every kid show should be on their level for us not to bash the property. Brain dumb entertainment can still be a masterpiece in a kid's eyes and could lead to them becoming a long-time fan for nostalgic reasons.
What we should bash, are harmful kids shows like Cocomelon who's animation was literally proven to be too fast for a young kid's brain to follow hence the infamous Cocomelon zombie-kid and the Cocomelon tantrums became a thing, because their brain speed has adjusted to a speed faster then real life speed. Anyone who listened often to Nightcore and then went on to listen to the original version, likely encountered this effect with the original song suddenly sounding slower then you remember it- thats your brain speed having adjusted to the Nightcore version.
I couldn't believe my eyes when the far right recently turnt on Cocomelon because of there being some LGBT episode, when Cocomelon was already proven to mess up a kid's brain speed and in kids with brains that are still that lacking of development we don't know how much fucking with their brain speed will lead to in their development. I saw parents turning away from that show during the Pandemic for this very reason so I was flabbergasted so many parents on the far right still let their kids watch Cocomelon in the first place!
It's cheaply made harmful material and I was quite literally fuming with all the stupid parents saying 'God, I really have to keep in mind what type of content my kids consumne', like yeah no shit Sherlock! The fact your kids were still watching all of it after the many controversies, proved you never cared about the quality of media your kids consumne in the first place, don't pull that stupid Pikachu face! The fact LGBT content is the straw and not the actual harm this show does to children's brain development makes me want to punch someone in the face.
Can male reviewers please start targeting the actual bad children's movies and shows and not shit on movies who simply didn't managed to strike the gold of a masterpiece in storytelling and possibly animation? If someone were to force me between watching Dreamworks' Trolls franchise the entire day over and over again and just one hour of Cocomelon, I'd still pick Trolls in a heartbeat.
Because watching an okay is always more better then watching a movie/show that actually deserves the label terrible.
