It’s not a critic’s job to convince you they’re right—whenever that actually happens.
On a good day, a critic champions what’s new with biting insight and relatable commentary, because rock and roll needed a cheerleader once. On other days (read: most), we’re just bitter asses.
A “good” car is hard to write about because good is subjective. What we “love”—and the reasons that we love it—is far easier to write about because love doesn’t need logic and can be argued ad nauseam in exchanges that end with, “… that’s why no one likes you.”
We’re the first to pay lip service by saying that we’re occasionally wrong, but we weren’t wrong about loving these cars. You just hated them.
What we said: “The 2009 Pontiac Vibe is another step forward for GM when it comes to materials and build quality.”
What you said: “The 2009 Pontiac Vibe is less sexy than IBS. I’d rather have a Hummer. What’s a credit default swap anyway?”
What we said: “The line dividing the two pieces of the window followed the angles of the upper door frame and windshield pillar—a design flourish usually seen on only the most exotic of supercars, often with gullwing or scissor doors.”
What you said: “The line dividing the two pieces of the window makes this techno-banana’s insane price more difficult to swallow. For about $ 10,000 less I can get a Mitsubishi Eclipse for my daughter, which is what she actually wants.”
What we said: “The result of all this suspension engineering is a unique vehicle that combines a comfortable ride and stable handling with minimal body roll and excellent steering feedback.”
What you said: “The result of all this black cladding and gray sheet metal is a sea lion that looks like it’s wearing plastic jousting armor.”