I believe "I Love Lucy" is credited with inventing or popularizing the three camera sitcom. Not to dampen's "Seinfeld"s contributions or the point of your comment, but I just wanted to add that small correction.

Just to mention it, this is literally named the Seinfeld is Unfunny effect on TVTropes

Seinfeld didn't invent the three camera sitcom, but it was important in creating modern sitcoms that didn't have a lesson to learn at the end of redeeming protagonists.

The Office (US) pretty much killed laugh tracks in US sitcoms.

They’re so bad.

…well the first one was. Didn’t bother with any after that…

Utter snoozefest I didn't get the hype at all

Great example of; just because it was a technical masterpiece, that doesn't make a movie good. The special effects were outstanding for the time, and still hold up very well. That is something I will always praise it for, but it is the only thing worth praising about it. It really is a very polished turd, in that sense.

I've never seen them, probably not going to either

...as opposed to the M. Night Shamalan movie?

We will never get along

Funny and original comment. Nicely done

It was special because "everyone" watched it. The meh or bad parts were whatever, while the exciting or good parts were something you could talk with all your friends about at school. This made the good parts uniquely good.

So unless you happened to both be alive and watch it when it ran, it just won't be amazing.

Same here. Personally I thought the British comedy Coupling was so much better done.

God thank you. I fucking despise that cover. It's honestly such a dumb fucking take on that song.

If I may add their cover of Land of Confusion by Genesis to the list. It was disappointing.

Source

Dont forget what they did on the Kinzie Street Bridge in Chicago.

100% with you on this.

I just don't get the appeal at all. I knew a couple that were all about String Cheese Incident. Finally listened to their stuff...fucking 15 minute long songs of fairly standard 90's ironic music zapped by bloat ray. Hard pass.

Well, that's just what the ass-crack bandit would say to throw us off their trail, isn't it...

There's a huge regional and cultural aspect to what you're saying. You're comparing slapstick in-your-face American comedy to subtle cringe British comedy. The Office is an excellent example since it is exactly the same script used in both initially. Watching S1E1 for British vs American version is an excellent comparison of styles. I don't like British comedy particularly and don't even like The Office, but watching both back to back, I would prefer the British version.

There are a number of amazing British comedies. They are very different to American. British comedies are understated and a bit miserable. Try "I'm Alan Partridge".....such an amazing comedy.

Equally I've tried watching Curb Your Enthusiasm with British friends and a large portion can't stand that for how cringe it is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

There's no superior choice in matters of art and taste. Just different flavours.

I can't watch The Office.

My empathy makes me feel super uncomfortable watching people do socially mean or cringe things. I enjoyed most of Parks and Rec, but I didn't like the way they treated Garry, and almost stopped watching because of that running gag.

Oddly enough, I devoured The Bear. It's not high anxiety or intensity that turns me off, it's the banal meanness that some express that I can't stand. The Bear is intense, but the characters feel genuine and honest

I nearly stopped after the first few episodes. They are really bad, I just cannot see the appeal of cringe comedy.

It terrifies me that there are people walking around out there who feel seen by Holden Caulfield.

A lot of the hype about Grease is nostalgia, no doubt about that.

But a lot of the rest is that a loooot of the songs are both catchy and very easy to understand. The movie also forms a social dynamic that is easy to understand for kids.

We learned to sing "Summer Nights" in school, and then friends and I would sing the song over and over, adding more and more childish humor that we found hilarious (because...kids). We also instantly got the implied social dynamic (boys just want to get sex, girls want to have mushy romance).

Family guy has always been bad, I lived through its peak and it was so painful

Catcher in the Rye was always an unforgivable whiney crap-mound of a book. Its notoriety is based on its banning, and the larger issue of whether people should be allowed to read books with swears, misanthropes, and sexual references in them, but there are and were so many better books featuring those things out there.

Family Guy is a fascinating case of a crappy show insisting upon itself so hard that it successfully got itself uncancelled and forced into pop culture as a zombie endlessly repeating itself on the level of its inspiration and closest rival The Simpsons.

I also loathe Grease but its general appeal is pretty easy to explain: it came out in the 1970s as a rose-tinted nostalgia piece for white middle-class boomers who grew up in the 1950s and, as so many people of all ages do, idealized their childhood era as when things were so cool and simple. (Spoiler to folks of all eras: things weren't actually any simpler when you were young, you were just shielded from more of the bullshit than you are now.) It was the same nostalgia that fueled the runaway success of Happy Days on TV in that era, though at least that show managed to be a functional sitcom with more substance to it than the empty-headed misogyny-flavored story of Grease.

It started out a lot funnier and slowly became darker over time. I think I remember Gilligan saying this was a conscious choice, to grow darker in tone over time.

Anyway, that's what hooked a lot of people initially, and a lot of them stuck around for the drama that followed

Genuinely though the Talking Pillow scene is still my favorite. As someone who lost a dad to cancer the conversation was morbidly funny and real to me, with the pillow as a perfect set piece.

Well, yeah, the whole show is based around each character being the worst narcissistic and self-serving asshole you can imagine, and then some.

I personally find it really funny, but I can sort of see why some people don't like it

This is a style that I first noticed with Archer, and it is very hard to do well. I enjoyed Archer, I enjoyed some of Rick and Morty, but I also recognize that I'd refuse to engage with someone like that in real life. Iasip takes it to the extreme of being genuinely unpleasant.

They take their twisted logic and antics to such extremes that it resembles a live-action version of some mid-20th century American cartoons. Same level of slapstick cruelty but the plotlines make it all more premeditated and sociopathic.

(I laugh hysterically at it, but I totally understand anyone who thinks it's depraved!)

The whole show is just a bunch of assholes being bigoted assholes

and then you are supposed to think that its funny.

I think it's supposed to be Seinfeld but moreso. Part of the humor is watching these assholes screw themselves over with their terrible plans.

I like it, but it seems really overrated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyoWmkhRyp8

The worst part is that if you somehow drag yourself through the first book and rightly declare that it sucks, fans will all say "Oh, yeah, the first book is bad, but it gets sooooo much better after that!"

This is a fucking lie. The books actually get progressively worse at a genuinely shocking rate.

Do you like reading a series of Wikipedia articles about all these really cool ideas the author had? Do you like being slapped in the face with moments of truly egregious sexism? Do you like characters with zero defining traits? Do you like entire plotlines built around Death Note style "I know that you know that I know that you know that I know..." style bullshit that falls apart the moment you think about it for five seconds? Do you like like awful solutions to the Fermi Paradox? Oh boy do we have the book series for you!

Preach.

I think I've read (or at least started reading) the book like three times and watched the show twice and I remember none of it

at least, I think it's that one. might have it mixed up with something else.

The only answer I can't understand. A great novel. I Chinese context was very fresh and interesting for me. Sometimes it seems amature, like fan fiction, like author is not a professional writer. But it makes it even better.

Oh my God, I thought it was just me. I usually consume a lot of sci-fi media in general and was like, "why can't I like this highly acclaimed work?"

Not liking anime is so isolating as a nerd because people find out I'm into nerdy stuff and all they want to do is recommend anime to me and talk about anime and I have to explain that I don't like anime and won't be watching that show they love (insert show here).

What's wrong with bugs bunny?

I never really liked South Park (with occasional exceptions where it shone) but I loved the movie.

I don’t like it but I cut them some slack for their willingness to tackle some issues publicly and mock people who deserve it.

I think out of all the Adult Swim type shows ( Family Guy, Robot Chicken, American Dad, South Park, etcetera ), I cannot stand any of them besides King of the Hill or Futurama. So definitely gonna agree with you.

Citizen Kane

@9point6@lemmy.world has a comment below stating that some of these are examples where a piece of media did something new and innovative that was so compelling that many subsequent pieces of media copied it, and thus whatever it was that the piece of media did failed to impress later audiences. For them, it was just the new normal. So the work was very influential...but maybe no longer stands out.

I've often seen Citizen Kane cited as being the poster child for this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Kane

The film's narrative structure, cinematography and themes have influenced countless filmmakers and films worldwide, asserting its place as a cornerstone in the history of cinema

EDIT:

https://thecinemaholic.com/...

‘Citizen Kane’: The Innovations, the Flaws, and the Films that it Influenced

EDIT2: @marzhall@lemmy.world linked to the Seinfeld is Unfunny trope on TVTropes, and it has an entry for Citizen Kane:

Citizen Kane, oftentimes trumpeted as "The Greatest Movie of All Time," tends to inspire "what's the big deal?" responses from modern viewers, especially since Post Modern movies have become the norm and the cinematography has influenced so many other films. And everyone knows what the twist at the end is.

Citizen Kane is generally considered the origin of the "innovative media that's considered boring because everyone copied it so now it seems cliche" trope. It was a masterpiece when it came out, but it pioneered so much stuff that became commonplace. When a modern audience looks back at it, you just see the cliches, without realizing that they're only cliches because they were endlessly repeated afterward.

This post made me angry because I’m one of the people that love this 3 movie and go passionate about them.

2001: A Space Odyssey

I like behind the scenes footage far more than the movie. I can appreciate how it's made but I absolutely can't stand to actually watch the resulting movie.

2001: A Space Odyssey is so insanely boring and pretentious, I’m still glad I watched it though because it’s very influential, you even see it in the Project Hail Mary movie, and it’s satisfying to have context to art but unless you’re really into watching films I wouldn’t suggest it to anyone

They are worshipped because they were the first in their particular area (neon cyberpunk, Space FX, non-linear storytelling). Each has been improved on by so many other films that the originals pale in comparison.

They are classics, but not timeless.

For blade runner the original film is awful. I didn't get the hype until I watched the directors cut which I personally thought was excellent.

2001 definitely overrated.

I enjoyed Citizen Kane though I completely understand why you wouldn't like it.

Blade Runner is sooo boring. I've tried watching it a few times and it just doesn't click for me.

Worst take of the thread, edgelord.

Never watched any star wars movie and at this points I've seen so many spoilers through memes that I am not very tempted to do so

Save for most of the original trilogy, Star Wars turned into actual dogshit halfway through Return of the Jedi.

Now it makes sense why so few British comedies work in the US. The US only knows how to laugh at the hero's jokes.

Same, I tried to watch it twice but never made it through.

I think it's the Disney adults who fangirl over the newslop.

It has some hooks that I can see people liking, but it is pretty understood that the game isn't for everyone.

I can a dumbed down version of it being played a lot in retirement homes.

You're the first person I've ever seen that made it that far into The Wire and didn't like it. Are you American? If not, I think that maybe makes more sense. For Americans, it's just such a great representation of so many things that every city experiences. And the fact that you see the same story from so many different perspectives is just SO compelling. I think it should be watched/taught in high schools because of how many perspectives it gives on the plights of society in American cities.

I think it takes a different approach mentally to enjoy it. Especially compared to anything modern. I'm working through it slowly myself and just finished season 3. I watch it with friends tho which maybe makes it easier to watch.

All that said, if it's not clicking after 10 hours, could be best to put it down. You can always try again later.

The wire's magic is that every character seems real, more like the show is a documentary rather than a TV show. And it carries all the way through, the quality never ends. You have to accept that you are watching a slow burn documentary, else you won't get it.

Agree, I actually think he is a fantastic actor and that’s missed in the role, don’t confuse the role with the actor and the tone of UK black comedy. Yes he roasts but it’s in a highlight kind of way and tends to be pointed at mocking privilege and arrogance. I’d suggest trying his other stuff like afterlife.

Only When I got to season 3 did I understand why people rave about it. Each season is like an onion layer.

If the actual premise of the show isn't interesting, then it may not matter how quality it is.

I feel like most people that read ASOIAF beforehand are disappointed with how it turned out. The first season is practically a perfect adaptation of the first book, except Tyrion now spends his time having sex with whores and getting drunk instead of spending his nights in the library reading as much as he can.

And that was the beginning of it going to shit

I was pretty happy with the first couple of seasons, but I didn't keep up with an HBO subscription to keep watching. A friend had some watching parties for the last season, and just ... ugh. Total waste of time.

Disney somehow made me absolutely apathetic to Star Wars, an IP that as a kid I used to go to sleep daydreaming about while listening to the soundtracks. The whole thing just feels stupid af now, and it's not just because I got older. It used to feel grounded in something, and now it feels unhinged.

Andor notwithstanding

I've seen it noted by better critics than me that when people criticize movies by fixating on hyper-specific inaccuracies or contradictions (the Cinema Sins method) they're usually expressing the fact that there were deeper underlying flaws in the movie itself that meant it failed to give them a reason to overlook those hyper-specific complaints.

After all, if the things you've listed here were reason enough to hate a film, on their own, you're basically just saying that you shouldn't watch movies. If you know enough about where and when a movie is set, you're guaranteed to be able to find those kinds of inaccuracies in any movie you watch, with very few exceptions.

The real problem here, I suspect, is that Kingdom of Heaven, as released is a bad movie. The director's cut, on the other hand, is incredible. Ridley envisioned this as a sprawling Lawrence of Arabia style historical epic, and that's the film he made. That film was then butchered to fit what the studio thought would make a good theatrical release.

The director's cut will not, to the best of my recollection, solve any of your specific complaints, but it is a far, far better movie.

Of course, it is possible that the version you saw was the director's cut, in which case I'm very sorry, movies set in any version of the real world just might not be for you. Or you're just not really a fan of historical epics or something. I dunno, you do you.

My mother is a huge star trek fan from the era where it was biggest. The thing that really did it for her was that it's one of the few good outcomes in the future. They're out on space exploring for altruism and the novelty of it, not colonialism, not for the destruction of earth's enemies, not to find a home became we destroyed ours, almost every other space media uses it as a for-warning of the outcome of the poor choice we currently make. Star trek is the future we want. No money because all needs are met. Alien contact because they believe we have potential to be equals, stuff like that.

The shows actually do a terrible job conveying this and a worse job using the tools at hand, but I honestly don't know any other media with such a hopefully fiew.

So.

Star Trek was genuinely groundbreaking when it aired. First was that basically no other sci-fi story had a hopeful vision of the future, so it was instantly different. Star trek was a meritocracy, it was post-scarcity, characters where hailed for being competent moral people, instead of morally bankrupt nepo-babies.

Second was that the show treated people like adults, a lot of the storytelling involved significant moral conundrums, and included scenarios with no easy answer.

Finally, the shows sci-fi setting let it tackle ideas that otherwise would be untouchable. Racism was shown to be absurd not by having black people and white people, but you could see a whole planet where people half-white and half-black would oppress (and be horribly racist) towards exactly the same people, but who had the white part on the other side of the body.

Finally, the casting for the show, and the characterization was amazing. Kirk is (imo) a boring character, but the dynamic of Kirk Spock and Scotty made for genuinely interesting interpersonal dialog.

Granted, its been done again and again, and done better (Notably, TNG is better in almost every way IMO), and so the formula got stale, and you cant help but compare Star Trek to the copies, several of whom inevitably did certain parts better.

It's really easy to rank the Star Trek TV series for me. The earlier it came out, the better.

I liked STNG at the time, but I tried watching them again recently and it didn't age well. I'm not even talking about the special effects or anything, I don't really care. I've gotten used to shorter serialized seasons rather than long episodic seasons.

For clarification: serialized = plot continues through episodes - vs- episodic = each episode is a self-contained plot

It was a book before a movie?

quick web search

Huh. TIL.

I was pretty young when that book got popular, maybe around 12. My mom really liked it and kept suggesting I read it but I just couldn't take it seriously when two characters had the same exact name. I don't understand if that was supposed to be a joke or just some quirky decision, but it immediately made me lose interest. I don't think I made it past chapter 2

Cats.

primordial anger, rage, terror

This is a typical response.

I think the show is ok, but could've been good with anyone else as Seinfeld. Jerry is the worst part of the show, especially the stand up bits at the beginning and end. I don't understand how he was ever popular

That's funny, I'm the exact opposite. I grew up never getting why people liked the Simpsons, but Futurama is one of the funniest, most entertaining, and most moving shows I've seen.

It’s very much a Gen-X nostalgia bucket.

Same. I used to watch Futurama a lot and I usually found it amusing, but I never made any audible noises of enjoyment.

There was a fantasy series that was kind of the same. It never got better than "mildly amusing" for me.

If you didnt laugh at futurama you didnt laugh at the simpsons. Even the early ones. You may have been a child that was giggling at the colors or that a catoon was on at night but you werent listenting to the punch lines at the time.

Doesn't everyone hate Enterprise?

They used to play music videos on that channel you know.

Fuck I'm old.

TIL: VH1 is no longer a music channel :/

I mean, celebrity news is a thing. Not something I'm into, but there's been demand for a long time.

well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man

I hated it the first time I watched it because it felt trite and asinine. I watched it again years later in a different headspace without the same expectations and it clicked for me.

Its a movie that mixes the deeply mundane with the deeply absurd on purpose, and it does it very well. It has a main charector that is boring as hell as a person but also an iconoclast that is immune from consequence, which the movie just amps up and up and up into mania, all while "the dude" just drifts through it. That conflict is where most of the humor lies, alongside just stunning acting from basically everyone in the movie.

The movie just moves from iconic moment to iconic moment between these insane people doing insane things in sometimes day to day ways, mixing up what normalicy is as a whole. Is it paying for half and half at a grocery store with a check you know will bounce in your bathrobe? Is it offering to blow strangers by your pool for 10k? Is it strapping yourself to a harness and screeching at a painting you fling yourself at to add a new layer of paint? Yes, it's all normal and its all absurd, just like the rest of the human experience.

Personally, I think the plot of just wanting to achieve a task as little as getting your carpet reimbursed and then running into all these absurd situations as a 'normal' dude makes it so appealing. Also the meme-ability helps. If the former is not your thing, we'll then this movie is not for you then (which is totally okay!)

We have truly become the society of the spectacle.

DFW’s nonfiction is his superior work. But who cares because Infinite Jest, bro!

I'm lead tou nderstand that drugs are often involved in developing appreciation for jam bands.

Went to a open session one time in a more jazz-oriented club. Wanted to play some vulfpeck with them if they knew it, but they didn't. All they did was pick 4 random chords from a jar, and jam to that for 10 minutes at a time. Sure, fucking around can be fun and they were great musicians to be honest, but as someone in the crowd at some point it was just boring. Jamming is fun but mostly for the musicians themselves, not for the crowd

Letterkenny isn't great, but I really do like Shoresy. The show format works a lot better I think.

Michelle Mylett is in it, though, so it's got that going for it.

I was also really disappointed by the adaptation, especially compared to the Martian. I'll see if I can find the comment where I talked about why and I'll come back and copy paste it.

Edit: here it is:

NOTE: I've tried to keep this as spoiler-free as possible, but even so you may not want to read this until after you've seen the movie.

The movie was definitely good, but fell pretty short compared to the book, and especially when compared to The Martian's adaptation.

For one, the movie felt way too much like a comedy, almost like a Taika Waititi Marvel adaptation of the much more serious (but still very funny) book, which felt tonally weird and didn't really land for me. Even the weight of the reveal of ::: spoiler spoiler Grace's refusal to go :::

was completely undercut by a tonally inappropriate, almost zany ::: spoiler spoiler chase sequence :::

that robbed the scene of most of the pathos it should have had. Reminds me of this excellent video about how modern blockbusters seem allergic to sincerity to their detriment.

We also didn't like how much more useless the movie made Grace feel. The book went out of its way early to show that he was a resourceful, intelligent, excellent problem solver, and while there was certainly a bit of this in the movie, it still felt like Grace was pretty much useless, undeserving dead weight, and like he either completely lucked his way through or had to rely only on

while in the book their partnership felt much more collaborative. All of this combined to make the reveal I mentioned earlier feel much darker/more depressing, because you get the impression that no, he really didn't deserve to be there, and then what he says at the end of the movie completely falls flat, because it felt like almost none of it was the result of his choices or character. Feels like it completely undercuts one of the main themes of the book, which is that he did deserve to be there, and that he was the right person for the job, even if he didn't think he was.

We also thought the movie omitted some of the book's best lines. "You can hear light?" is an all-time great line that still gives me shivers, and it definitely should have been in the movie.

Things we liked: 1. The movie was visually stunning - everything it was going for in the looks department it completely nailed. 2. One of the most important characters in the movie was very well done, in both design and characterization. Maybe a bit too manic, but that's a relatively small quibble in the larger context of just how well they did with him.

So yeah, very much an enjoyable two hours, but not as good as it should have been due to a few flawed adaptation decisions.

Such an interesting premise ruined by fourth-grade humor. I don't mind having some dry humor moments, but it was the entire freakin' thing.

The book was MUCH better. I think it was made assuming most its audience read the book.

I would never put the book as a comedy. Was the movie supposed to be funny?

Username checks out.

And I don't call it rap music because it's not music.

Disliking something doesn't inherently exclude it from a category. Rap is a genre of music, what else could it possibly be? So are country and metal, even if many dislike them.

Hip hop comes from the projects in the Bronx neighborhood of New York City, where it coalesced from several different art forms developed in defiance of rampant poverty and oppression.

All these people do is write down a bunch of words and speak them.

Those people couldn't afford 'real' instruments and didn't have the musical education to take advantage of them anyway. Turntables became instruments in their hands because there were no other options. Rap itself draws a pretty straight line from poetry- infuse some more emotion and performance, and you get rap.

As the movement grew in popularity, the hip hop and rap genres were effectively stolen around the turn of the century by producers to sell to white people instead of allowing it to thrive in the black communities that created them in the first place. The lyrics changed from being about surviving and thriving in spite of The Man to focusing on exploiting women and doing drugs, in ignorance of the short but rich history behind the genre.

(I'm lounging in bed writing this on my phone, so no direct sources sorry. We talked about this in one of my high school classes eons ago, I might be able to dig up those files later if there's interest.)

In that sense, it's not all that different from the newer corporatized country that you spoke about, or even rock and roll. If you're going to mad about rap lyrics, be mad at the cultural theft and exploitation rather than discounting it wholesale just because you dislike the sound.

I don't think I'd call rap not music.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music

Music is the arrangement of sound to create some combination of form, harmony, melody, rhythm, or otherwise expressive content.

I think that it meets that bar.

I don't like it myself, either, but there are plenty of genres of music that I don't like.

When I see people riding down the road bumping modern rap music, I just shake my head, especially 30-year-old or 40-year-old white women.

Like, because it originated from black artists? I mean...I've heard people make similar statements before, but jazz also originated with black artists, and I haven't heard people object to white people listening to jazz.

Maybe they did and it was just before my time. I remember a World War II Danish Nazi poster complaining about the jitterbug, which also originated with black artists, but that seemed to take issue with the music rather than who was listening to it.

searches

Hmm. Though it sounds like there was some friction:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jitterbug

Swing dancing originated in the African-American communities of New York City in the early 20th century.[5] Many nightclubs had a whites-only or blacks-only policy due to racial segregation, however the Savoy Ballroom in Harlem had a no-discrimination policy which allowed whites and blacks to dance together[6] and it was there that the Lindy Hop dance flourished,[7] started by dancers such as George Snowden and Frank Manning. The term jitterbug was originally a ridicule used by black patrons to describe whites who started to dance the Lindy Hop, because they were dancing faster and jumpier than was intended, like "jittering bugs",[8] although it quickly lost its negative connotation as the more-erratic version caught on.

EDIT: The WW2 poster referencing jitterbug that I was remembering:

https://lemmy.today/...)

I think it's important to parse country music. There's Nashville country music and then there's county music. Actual country music is great. Nashville country music is not.

And I don't call it rap music because it's not music.

shit only racists say

Y/A wasn’t even a genre when it was written

Dune has an examination of the chosen one trope. You can pull a lot of meaning out it, but it certainly does more than unabashedly say it's a good thing.

Regarding the Fremen, idea of a chosen one in-universe only exists because it was seeded as a self-serving belief by a foreign religious group messing with their culture. It isn't a "real" prophecy, but one seeded so that it can be potentially "fulfilled" by someone in the know in-universe. The fremen follow Paul into war with fanatic zeal. This examines how damaging religious influence is.

The Kwisatz Haderach angle is another "prophecy" except it is being actively worked to be fulfilled in-universe using non-mystical means. Paul realizes how terrible it is to be this type of chosen one and rather than fulfill it he abandons it, and not in the cool "rebel taking down the system" way, but in the "overwhelmed by the weight of it", way. He becomes broken and all for nothing since his son just completes the path he was on anyway, and it leads to a lot of (nessesary?) evil at his command.

Top tier Pocahontas troll bait mate 👌

madmaxthatsbait.gif

I think that it's reasonable to like or dislike something without them needing to analyze further for that opinion to be valid. I think it's fine for someone to say that they don't like the taste of, say, strawberry ice cream without being obligated to break it down further. I mean, people form opinions without trying to psychologically analyze themselves.

And I don't think that people generally "choose to not like something" either. People don't say to themselves anything like "I think I'll dislike the flavor of strawberry ice cream."

Opinions regarding preferences don't need to be backed by anything. I don't like the color puce but couldn't say "why"

I can not and will not explain precisely why eating dog shit is nasty, but the flies seem to love it.

Its nasty tho

the majority of responses are unbacked opinions

I feel that is generally the type of thing on any option based social media thread