disqusfcfrmmsvva--disqus
Joseph
disqusfcfrmmsvva--disqus

I'm not used to seeing reviews of anything where the review is based strictly on the merits of the given show or artist. Frankly, I don't really consider that reviewing because it's more akin to blogging or a general fan discussion. In my opinion, a "review" should exist in relation to the medium itself. In that

I agree (once again), and think this reviewer is asking way too much of a show that hasn't stopped being engaging or entertaining since it's first episode. To drag it into "C" territory is frankly an injustice because it has nothing in common with nearly any average TV show that would deserve such a grade. This

It was actually the word "meaningless" that I was offended by. Additionally, watching something and writing up an immediate, from-the-gut reaction is actually a piss-poor way to review something (even though I do appreciate the promptness). There are many works of art that take at least a little time to digest and I

My notion is that any given review under one banner should be somewhat consistent with the general median of said banner, and that the banner publication should aim to uphold a certain standard no matter how many reviewers it utilizes. If one reviewer is saying the "Battle Creek" pilot episode, which more or less

I'm pointing to AVClub specifically because they actually embraced the "campaign arc" put forward this season (giving pretty consistently high grades to a lot of those episodes) and then gave lower grades to the more recent episodes, which in my opinion were more or less as engaging. I think it's a fair argument in

Or I'm simply educated and raise some decent points, but an intellectual discussion about the topic at hand—which was derailed the moment you used insulting terminology—is too much for you to handle. I know that actual analysis is out of vogue these days, as made readily apparent by your recent reply. You can go back

Just because one reviewer isn't reviewing or watching everything on TV, doesn't mean they can't take other TV shows (certainly more than the whopping 3 or 4 that they're reviewing) or other reviews into consideration when they put forward a letter grade or a star grade or whatever. It's called "reviewing TV" in case

Yeah, man. So messed up. Every critic needs to have, like, their own voice, duuude. This is just like a space where they express themselves, and anything they say shouldn't be a reflection of the banner under which they operate. And, like, when one critic reviews a show, he or she shouldn't consider what another

So what? Both critics represent the same publication. If they aren't hashing things out to achieve a level of "consistency" they might as well not operate under one banner. It's by no means "silly" or "meaningless" to expect consistency from a publication—in fact I would think it's "silly" not to. But thank you for

Ummm, no. This is not an "A" movie by any means.

I'm not in agreement with the latest reviews for this show. The Ferguson episode might have been subpar but it was well above a C- grade compared to just about every other hourlong drama on TV. I caught the premiere of Battle Creek for instance, which AVClub gave a B- to. That show was completely overridden with bad

YMO's debut came out in 1978—Kraftwerk had already released something like 6 or 7 albums by then. This isn't about who's "better" (even if Kraftwerk is arguably "better" than YMO), it's about who was more groundbreaking and influential. One could almost argue YMO was little more than a Japanese Kraftwerk knock-off.

I would think no discussion of synth pop is complete when it doesn't mention artists like Kraftwerk and Brian Eno, who did plenty for the genre. Kraftwerk was definitely a little more than just the group that influenced Bowie—they were directly responsible for influencing a legion of UK synth pop acts. All this said,

Hahaha! Yes, I don't kindly to insulting comments. But thank you for pointing to a fruitless article—it's good to know you don't actually possess any knowledge of your own. I'm very well educated in Beach Boys 101, thank you. "Smile" is still not an acclaimed album because it was never really an "album" unless you

"Smile, one of the most acclaimed BB albums/works"

They wouldn't let you in.

Yeah! Get him, bruh! Get him good!

You turn in mediocre comments, but that doesn't stop you from trying. Bruh.

And you use words to sound like you know something when you don't. Everyone has their flaws.

Your post is idiotic on so many levels it's almost hard to break down. God bless those noble hip-hop artists and DJs with such pure, giving, charitable souls. The members of Led Zeppelin, on the other hand, are pure evil, lazily taking riffs and just doing nothing with them. You talk like someone who doesn't care for