The portrait of Bill Clinton. The Batman. Passions of the Christ.

What do these three have something in common?

Simple: they all have critics, who are, for the most part, negative, just because these three are not part of "the usual".

To me, I have just to say one thing: criticism only draw interest.

In fact, the movie, whihc I mention early, drew audience because criticism of the movie was made even before it came out. In fact, movies like The Da Vince Code and Brokeback Mountain did vcery well because of criticism.

Another part of criticism is people accusing certain shows, movies, books or games as rip-offs, just because of the genre and the way it was displayed.

Once again, I have one thiung to say: where's the proof?

Most people that calls certain entertainment media as "rip-offs" oftenly fail to grasp the fact that they don't have evidence to prove that show is indeed a rip-off. even when they have evidence, the materials in them would show how different they are then the critics claim.

Generally, I say criticism aren't effective as they use to be.

Any opinions?