pen

Admins
  • Content count

    57,237
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About pen

  • Rank
    Legend
  • Birthday 06/06/1983

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. They're apparently working on their first album in forever so there might be hope yet.
  2. Another cover of Rebel Yell, eh?
  3. I thought that since Iron Fist came out and we have Defenders and Punisher on the way this year, not to mention other shows like Runaways and Cloak And Dagger in the pipeline, it might be nice to just have a thread devoted to discussing all this goodness, especially since all the shows are connected. Hence this thread, which can be used for anything related to the MCU on the small screen. I also finished Iron Fist yesterday, and now that I've had a chance to sit with the material, I thought I might take time out to share my thoughts. I will try to keep spoilers to a minimum at first, but eventually I'll outline my complete thoughts under a spoiler tab. First, just my overall thoughts. I believe Iron Fist is a good show, and worth watching. It is not a perfect show, and I will concede there are some scenes that could have been done better, and some missed opportunities here and there, but I haven't found anything in the show that's irritated me like the annoying neighbors in Jessica Jones or the Black Sky nonsense in Daredevil Season 2, which I forgave of those shows because everything else was so good. I will concede this may be the weakest of the Netflix shows so far, but that's not the same as saying it's not good. I strongly advise anyone going into it to try to give as many episodes a chance as possible as a lot of newer reviewers have admitted that the show progressively gets better and while people criticized Daredevil Season 2 and Luke Cage of being top heavy, Iron Fist may have the opposite issue. If anyone watching the first episode likes it right off the bat, then I think you'll be satisfied by the end. Second, and I don't think it's really spoilers to say this, but unfortunately we do not see the mythical city of K'un-Lun or Shao Lao The Undying in the show beyond a few scant snowy mountain scenes and some brief hints of the latter. This means a lot of the time the show has to tell rather than show, and I know that's a bummer, but I fully believe that has more to do with budget limitations than anything else, and the show does what it can with what it has. I don't think it hurts the show in the long run, and I'd rather they not show those things if doing so would have to be done awkwardly. With that out of the way, now to divulge my specific thoughts, which I will put behind a spoiler wall because spoilers galore.
  4. If they didn't vote for them now, they probably wouldn't vote for them later.
  5. Actually, the physical copy adds two previously released b-sides and three covers for a total of 13 tracks. Savvy move or dick move? You decide.
  6. Metacritic's score is also based on significantly less people than Rotten Tomatoes, although I'm not sure if that means anything or not. It's also kind of unfortunate that there doesn't seem to be a way to see a breakdown of the score apart from the people who actually submitted reviews instead of just rating the show. It is interesting venturing inside those numbers that the people who score the show favorably really score it highly and the people who don't score it bottom of the barrel, so that actually might also be a factor in way the overall rating is drawn more toward the middle. There's an answer for everything, I guess is what I'm saying, and we can never really know for sure. You also keep saying that there's no variation in audience ratings and that's why it's meaningless. I'm still waiting for evidence that this is the case. I feel that you must have something, otherwise why would you make the assumption?
  7. Not to push things further, but I also would be interested in hard evidence regarding the whole "audiences vote positively for everything" angle, because while I'm sure audiences vote more positively than critics, I find it hard to believe that it's impossible to gauge the worth of something by audience reaction.
  8. We're going to have to agree to disagree on some of this because it's obvious we're coming from two different mindsets. I don't agree that audience reviews should be ignored because they're people with opinions and all opinions are valid unless based on a faulty factual foundation. If people like a show, they like a show. Not every show is for everyone and it doesn't mean it's of low quality or that people are too dumb to tell the difference. For what it's worth, I'm not saying the opinions of the critics are invalid either. All I was commenting on is the disconnect between what the media is reporting and what's actually happening. It is especially annoying when someone writes an article about how it might be up in the air if Iron Fist gets a Season 2 because of how poor it fared with critics when it's clear it's resonating with audiences. I will also comment that no, I don't believe there is a grand conspiracy here (although I also believe Mike has held perfectly valid and reasonable opinions at times and also deserves the courtesy of not being dismissed out of hand). However, it's hard to ignore that this show had an uphill battle with critics who were already upset that Marvel chose not to cast an Asian actor as Iron Fist and the reviews I've read do make it clear that this at least had some effect on how the show is being perceived. It's not impossible for multiple people to hold the same chip on their shoulder, but we can never know, so it's pointless to debate.
  9. 1. Okay, sure, I'll concede the average Joe may be more likely to forgive flaws in a program vs. someone who spends their life critiquing them for a living, but my argument wasn't to suggest that the critics are wrong for holding their opinions. Just annoyance that audience reviews are largely being ignored in the press. It creates a false perception that the show is a failure, when it clearly isn't. 2. I will also concede that the flipside does exist, and it wasn't my intention to suggest otherwise, but at least we agree that both statements can be true. I'm not about to argue which side is more prevalent because neither of us can know. However, the fact that the cultural appropriation debacle seems to come up in every review, whether it makes logical sense or not, seems to suggest that critics had a grudge against the show from the start. The fact that the audience reaction seems largely to be "What are they on about?" is a disparity that should not be dismissed or ignored.
  10. But we're not talking about someone knowing more about mechanics or knowing more about filmography, are we? We're not talking about someone knowing more about an actual task or factual knowledge that anyone would have to learn themselves to be an expert on. We're talking about opinions. If I watch 2000 movies then I definitely have more factual knowledge about those movies, but my opinion on them remains an opinion. I'm also going to posit my opinion that the more you watch of anything, the less new things tend to excite you in the same way it might someone else who is coming into something with fresher eyes. I'd wager if I watched a hundred westerns I'd probably not want to see another western ever again. Doesn't mean someone who hasn't watched the hundred I have wouldn't enjoy it more.
  11. Frankly, and not to demean someone's life work, but that is an excellent question, because ultimately any opinion is just that. An opinion, and that holds true no matter how many movies or shows or games or music you've subjected yourself to over the years. If you agree with his opinions and enjoy reading his reviews then I'd say that's the real purpose of a critic existing; to give people a foundation to build from. That doesn't change my point though: if 2954 people hold a different opinion than 36 people, why should I take the 36 people more seriously?
  12. And? I didn't think you had to be a "buff" to have a valid opinion.
  13. My point is I fail to see why the opinion of 36 people should be bigger news than the opinion of 2954 other than the fact that they get paid for their opinions. I also think it's a logical fallacy to assume that most movies and shows get high user ratings unless you have something to back that statement up.
  14. So this isn't a movie but I can't think of anywhere else to put this, but I finished the first four episodes of Iron Fist and I'm about to continue with the next few. Honestly, I'm really enjoying the show so far and I can't imagine why critics have been busting this show's balls so much apart from the "Iron Fist should be Asian" controversy that frankly is problematic no matter what stance gets taken. Case in point, it really annoys me that news outlets everywhere are reporting on Iron Fist's 17% critics rating on Rotten Tomatoes which is based on only 36 reviews. Meanwhile 2954 viewers have given it an overall 87%, which is comparable to the rating audiences gave Luke Cage, but no one seems to want to talk about that because I guess "suck it critics" isn't a great enough headline.