victorz comments on This thing is broken

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

Why were you expecting something in the first place? Doesn't sound to me like it's the fault of the show.

I thought the show was amazing. Very novel concept. Both sides don't need to be masterminds. I don't see how that would've been better. The deductions of one mastermind is enough for me to ride on. 👍

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

Why were you expecting something in the first place?

Because that's how storytelling works? If you don't expect anything from the story, you aren't invested into it and you aren't enjoying it.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

I mean why were you expecting something beforehand? Not during. I wasn't expecting anything, and I still enjoyed the show for what it was. No need to add a second mastermind. What happened in the show was exciting, and I'm not so sure adding a second mastermind would've made it better. 🤷‍♂️

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

Because the first few episodes leads you to it. You get this cool main character who takes it upon himself to purge the world of those who can't be made responsible for their evil otherwise, and then you get the detective angle. It clearly tries to be Holmes Vs Moriarty type of thing, except with the opposite PoV. If you didn't get those expectations from the show itself and enjoyed it, good for you! It was a different experience for me, especially with how much praise I've heard about it beforehand

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] victorz@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

Sounds to me like you are watching this show, right, and then you notice it resembles something you've experienced before, and then you get "mad" because it's not exactly/more like that. But with a different POV etc. That's what I'm reading here. 🤷‍♂️

You're putting it on the show that it "clearly tries" to be something that you've experienced. If one isn't familiar with Holmes and Moriarty, the show will not seem to be trying to be anything. It just is.

It's a very common thing that people do, and it takes will and ~~physiological~~ psychological determination to stop doing, so you can just enjoy content for what it is rather than compare it to something else. It doesn't need to be what you've seen before. 🙂👍

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

Sounds to me like you're reading way too much into other people not liking the same thing you like. It's a very common thing that people do, and it takes will and physiological determination to stop doing, so you can just enjoy the content for what it is rather than seek validation in others' opinions.

You really don't have to fanboy for Light this hard.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

Sounds to me like you're ignoring my arguments and just parroting my shit. Pretty childish. 🫤

Especially when it's fully unfounded. I'm not a "fan" of the show and I never was or said I was. I just enjoyed it. And I'm not a fan of any particular character, specifically, either. Definitely not seeking your validation at all, holy hell. 😄

Can you deny the veracity of my arguments though?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

There is no argument, though. You're expressing your subjective opinion, which is normal to have. What's not normal is expecting everyone else to have the same opinion and presenting disagreement as some sort of disorder that I need to get over. That's the validation seeking behaviour.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child)

Nope, you're overthinking it. I'm not saying you have a disorder.

And I don't seek your validation, I already told you that.

My god this is long winded.

The first comment made in reply to me was "he is dumb though" as if it is wrong to say the show is good.

Though.

Tell me how that comment isn't expecting others to agree with that opinion? Did you notice how that's what I reacted to from the start?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

You saying I need "will and physiological determination" (whatever that means) definitely read like you think I have physiological issues. Which means a disorder. For someone who doesn't seek validation, you're very eager to try and present your subjective opinion (enjoying the show) as an objective fact (show is good). I didn't enjoy the show as much as you because of the main character, that is all. You insisting I must have had some expectations from outside of the show that make my opinion invalid is exactly the kind of overthinking you're projecting on me.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

Just because I used the word "psychological" in a sentence when talking to you doesn't mean I'm saying you have a disorder, lol, wtf. Definitely putting words in my mouth, and/or projecting, who knows.

You're still not understanding what point I'm making. All I'm saying is that you've acted since our first interaction like I wasn't entitled to saying the show is pretty good. You said "he's a dumbass though". THOUGH. You understand the meaning of that word in its context? It's the same meaning as "but". As in you are objecting.

So, no, I'm still not seeking validation (so drop it), and I'm still not trying to validate my opinion. I'm just saying that you're putting your opinion against mine like yours is a fact that makes the show worse, when that isn't the case. I don't know if you've noticed you've done this. I say this to you but you are glossing over it each time. Just like I bet you will this time.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

You've used the word "physiological", brother. You're literally backtracking on the exact words you've used while nitpicking on mine, and then you're telling me I'm the one projecting.

I'm just saying that you're putting your opinion against mine like yours is a fact that makes the show worse,

Which is not what's happening here, you're still making shit up.

I suppose I shouldn't have replied to any of your comments past the first. I dared to dislike something that you like, which immediately makes all my replies invalid and you always correct. You can go on and have a nice rewatch of Death Note or something. I'm quite done with this argument.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago

You've used the word "physiological", brother.

Thanks, I see where the mishap occurred, that was a swipe type typo. Corrected to "psychological". 👍 Probably a huge source of confusion between us, unfortunately.

But since you just want out of this, let's indeed cut it here. You're not representing my arguments in a correct light at all, and I'm probably not representing myself well in this conversation either, so it's better to just say adieu. 🤝 We're probably just talking past each other completely (myself included as also guilty, most likely).

I'm gonna continue watching Fear The Walking Dead. 😉 Have you seen that shit? That shit fyre. Hoping there's some tie-ins to The Walking Dead, which I just finished.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

lemmy:	0.19.20
mlmym (mschae):	26.3.4