I like it but don’t put Drinker in charge of it. He shilled for The Last of Us scene depicting sodomites as a great episode that is neutral. If we acquiesce to that then there’s no point of even having one of these
The Drinker was just an example, there are many places where review summaries can be sourced.
I avoided giving a clear definition of what "woke" means because the definition will always be chosen by whoever steps up to do the work. That's always the only thing that matters. Ideas are 1%, implementation is everything. I write ideas because I don't have time to implement even a tiny fraction of the projects that spring to mind, thanks to the handful I already started which consume most of the day. Agree with Alex or not, he produces content day in day out and that's what moves the needle.
On the topic of homosexuality specifically, the question for whoever starts the project is market size and demand. The American Christian community has a long track record of projects like this, where they club together to fund content reviews done according to their value systems:
They break it down by several categories recognizing that not every Christian has a problem with on-screen violence, for instance.
The biggest gap in the market is for services and products targeted at "normie" non-woke morality, which doesn't condemn homosexuality or feel distressed by depictions of it, but does dislike exaggerated depictions of its scale. An occasional homosexual relationship on screen doesn't bother them because this matches their understanding of the true frequency and therefore of human nature, and they might well have homosexual friends or work colleagues without it bothering them, but when half the characters on screen are flamboyantly gay or this is pointlessly made central to the story they feel they're being socially engineered - a sensation which nobody finds pleasant. This sort of thing is hard to capture in a clear rating system, and will inevitably involve either conflict or compromise with people whose tolerances are different.
The Critical Drinker makes reviews targeted squarely at this sort of 90s-2000s era morality, which is more bothered by the ham-fisted social engineering of The Message than whatever The Message actually is or isn't. Whether that's something worth scaling up is left as an exercise for the reader.
I like it but don’t put Drinker in charge of it. He shilled for The Last of Us scene depicting sodomites as a great episode that is neutral. If we acquiesce to that then there’s no point of even having one of these
The Drinker was just an example, there are many places where review summaries can be sourced.
I avoided giving a clear definition of what "woke" means because the definition will always be chosen by whoever steps up to do the work. That's always the only thing that matters. Ideas are 1%, implementation is everything. I write ideas because I don't have time to implement even a tiny fraction of the projects that spring to mind, thanks to the handful I already started which consume most of the day. Agree with Alex or not, he produces content day in day out and that's what moves the needle.
On the topic of homosexuality specifically, the question for whoever starts the project is market size and demand. The American Christian community has a long track record of projects like this, where they club together to fund content reviews done according to their value systems:
https://www.movieguide.org/reviews/borderlands.html
They break it down by several categories recognizing that not every Christian has a problem with on-screen violence, for instance.
The biggest gap in the market is for services and products targeted at "normie" non-woke morality, which doesn't condemn homosexuality or feel distressed by depictions of it, but does dislike exaggerated depictions of its scale. An occasional homosexual relationship on screen doesn't bother them because this matches their understanding of the true frequency and therefore of human nature, and they might well have homosexual friends or work colleagues without it bothering them, but when half the characters on screen are flamboyantly gay or this is pointlessly made central to the story they feel they're being socially engineered - a sensation which nobody finds pleasant. This sort of thing is hard to capture in a clear rating system, and will inevitably involve either conflict or compromise with people whose tolerances are different.
The Critical Drinker makes reviews targeted squarely at this sort of 90s-2000s era morality, which is more bothered by the ham-fisted social engineering of The Message than whatever The Message actually is or isn't. Whether that's something worth scaling up is left as an exercise for the reader.