tv_talk | TV Tuesday: Expert Takes

Yeah, reviews are pretty important to me. I get anxious all the time about public opinions of stuff so I may avoid stuff based on that.

Are these professional reviews or ones you tend to see in your feeds?

A mixture of both, though admittedly I prefer reviews made by professional writers who do video essays as a hobby, if that makes sense. People who can understand writing and editing errors better than non professionals.

Yes, and especially with something multimedia it's nice to have video reviews where people can single out examples of particular things.

Not very, unless it's a personalized review from friends telling me things I do or don't like are in something. I might check out a badly-reviewed show out of contrariness/curiosity, does that count? And sometimes bad reviews accidentally makes something sound entirely my jam. Like, this historical show is too frothy and soapy you say? Oh no, I hate soap operas! (/s, I do not hate soap operas.) Too many queer people and bipoc in this one you say, it's too woke? *runs to watch*

I think I also just don't watch enough prestige tv for reviews to often end up being around in high enough numbers, maybe I'd feel differently if I did!

Ha, yes sometimes what someone dislikes is exactly what intrigues!

And sometimes bad reviews accidentally makes something sound entirely my jam. Like, this historical show is too frothy and soapy you say? Oh no, I hate soap operas! (/s, I do not hate soap operas.) Too many queer people and bipoc in this one you say, it's too woke? *runs to watch*

Hee! I'm the same. You're telling me this historical show has a feminist and gay agenda, too much sex, and -- horror of horrors! -- also POC in it? It sounds as if I should watch the shit out of that. (Too bad, though, that the shows are usually not as feminist or queer or diverse as these reviews make it sound.)

Reviews are important to me. There is so much available content now, and I have limited amounts of time, so reviews will help me prioritize my viewing choices. For example, there may be a show that I'd previously read about that sounded potentially interesting to me (not reviews, just that it was coming -- like in a fall preview sort of thing), but then if, once available, the reviews are mostly so-so, it's not that I won't watch it, but I may deprioritize it in favour of something else that has better reviews.

That said, just because something has rave reviews doesn't mean I will watch it. There are certain types of subject matter that do not interest me AT ALL, e.g. shows about organized crime, superhero stuff (e.g. all the Marvel shows), shows about rich people being shits -- not interested. So no matter how rave the reviews for things like The Sopranos, Succession, Industry, etc., I don't care. I know from experience that I just won't be able to get into those types of shows, so I don't bother with them.

Similarly, some genres tend to get so-so reviews more often than other genres -- science fiction, I'm looking at you. I still, to this day, remember The Guardian's review of The Expanse when it started. You could sum it up as "ooh, this show has lots of characters and I don't know who's doing what or why. So confusing. This isn't very good." And they never revisited the show after that. So I will take those sorts of reviews with a grain of salt because I really love sci fi and maybe am more forgiving -- or just better able than most TV critics to appreciate sci fi.

Yes, there are some critical darlings I have tried out and had no interest in, including those you mentioned. However I think that for me a lot depends on the way stuff is carried out as much as the premise. This is particularly true for mysteries (I lean to the cozy, avoid the angsty and grisly). But I do like strategy stuff, so I have enjoyed Billions. I've also been watching The Killing for the last few days and it's twistier than I expected.

That said, I have yet to try out The Bear because family issues and a lead in turmoil does not appeal to me.

Agreed about the way fantasy and scifi (or romance for that matter) tends to get few critical plaudits.

I've also been watching The Killing

The original Danish one -- Forbrydelsen?? It's SO good. I never bothered with the US remake.

I tried The Bear, but didn't even make it through the first episode.

Edited 2024-12-24 21:44 (UTC)

That said, I have yet to try out The Bear because family issues and a lead in turmoil does not appeal to me.

I really enjoyed the first season but everything I have read about the show since sounded so stressful that I haven't felt like catching up in years.

Yikes at that The Expanse review. I really struggle with large casts, but I always saw the first season as a well-executed noir detective story within a sci-fi setting. The mystery angle was what made me fall in love with it in the first place.

The Expanse is an interesting example for me because I absolutely would not have stuck with it had I not heard a lot of great reviews for it (both pro and fannish). I understand the show could probably not have done much differently in setting up all the characters and story strands but I was just not engaged with it. By the last few episodes of S1 though I was completely on board as I saw how it came together and I enjoyed every other season of it to come.

I don't really care about reviews, assuming we're talking about the opinions of TV critics. However, I am generally interested in the views of fannish people because they are usually closer to my interests than professional critics. That said, if there's a perceived trend of terrible reviews for a certain show, I will check out the reason(s) and judge whether I still want to watch it.

For example, I didn't really like the first episode of My Lady Jane but I will probably give it another chance because so many fannish people have raved about the romance. I also wouldn't read any critic's review of a K-drama. You must know the genre and understand the language/cultural context to offer valuable insight. While there are certainly some reviewers who are familiar with the genre, I see much more love for detail and discussions about characterization/acting choices in fannish discourse.

Edited 2024-12-24 20:05 (UTC)

I used to check out reviews a lot in the past when I was still a regular newspaper reader, or even regular news listener. But I don't tend to stumble across them these days, and am more likely to be linked to a review by someone already watching a show.

Not important at all to me. So many shows I like have gotten bad reviews and so many I dislike are given glowing reviews that I don't pay attention to them at all now (its the same with other media too) at least until after I have watched something. I sometimes go look what other people though after the fact, but not before.

Another problem is that new shows very often only have the pilot and maybe another episode or two reviewed, and where a show goes from there can be completely different. To me Community is a good example.

Edited 2024-12-25 19:03 (UTC)

Eh, not that important.

As a general rule I don't judge on what I would watch (or even read) based on reviews. Reviews are generally very much opinion pieces that are subjective and biased, and oftentimes I find that the stuff I do enjoy are usually panned by a lot of critics or not entirely liked by general audiences, so y'know. That's not to say I won't read reviews from online friends for something they recently watched, especially if it's something that I've already watched or plan on watching in the near future, but that's mainly because it opens a discussion already on friendly terms. Otherwise, I don't let reviews (audience or critic) influence what I might be interested in, especially since review bombing to skew rating scores/opinions is a very real problem, not just for television but all forms of media and fiction.

If I see something I might like I'll go into it first before reading any other potential reviews, which I often take with a grain of salt because, well, we all have our opinions on things.

Edited 2024-12-25 00:49 (UTC)

Your comment about review bombing reminded me of another factor no one's mentioned yet, which is audience ratings of items on a streaming service. I was put out when Netflix changed its ratings system from 1 to 5 stars to a thumbs up or down (which is common on other services too). I don't bother to review things at all since I'm rarely either very enthusiastic or utterly hate something. In fact, if I do, I'm not likely to watch long enough to judge with any kind of fairness.

They are of very little importance to me. I tend to dislike "popular" things and like the ones that others don't. If something gets tons of glowing reviews, I'm likely to give it a pass.

Some of it to me depends on when the review was done. For example, sometimes stuff is reviewed retrospectively after the show is done or it ends up on a "best of" list which I feel better reflects what's important about a show.

I am not even aware of TV reviews, outside of fans posting here and personal journals

I do come across them sometimes but a lot less than in the past. Plus with so much content, there is going to be quite a lot of stuff which goes completely unreviewed.

Reviews over time have become increasingly unimportant and frustrating to me. The difficulty with reviews is - it's really depends on what the reviewer happens to like, and more often than not the review is about the reviewer's tastes, not the television show, book, or film they are reviewing.

For example? A professional television critic often has to sample all television series. And they do not like superhero films or television shows. But do love to distraction gangster and crime series.
They give a wonderful review to The Penguine, but despise say, Ms. Marvel. I can't take them seriously. Or a better example? The critics who tanked The Avengers for being a superhero film. It is a superhero film. That's the genre. The reviewer is critiquing something for being exactly what it is meant to be. It would be like giving a bad review to say a pumpkin pie for being well a pumpkin pie.

The other difficulty with reviews is everyone and their dog is reviewing things now, and a lot people's idea of providing a review is: I didn't like it. It was unrealistic. And dark. (Okay, that's nice, but how was it unrealistic and dark? )

Or the reviewer will provide one too many spoilers - giving away the entire plot of the movie. (This was true of one too many reviews of the film "MidSommer" - people just couldn't help themselves. As a result, I didn't feel a need to see it - I already knew the story.)

It's hard to write reviews. There's three things that the reviewer must be mindful of: 1) that someone worked really hard to bring this work to life, 2) that just because the reviewer despised it doesn't mean someone else won't love it, and currently does and this whole thing is subjective, 3)it's not about the reviewer - it's about the art/content and what worked for the reviewer, and what didn't, and how to convey that without spoiling the work.

The reader of the review - wants to know if the television show, film or book would work for "them" not whether it just works for the reviewer. They want to know if they should sample it, give it a try, or if they should steer clear. So they are looking for certain things in the review to let them know that.

You'd think having more reviewers - I'd be able to find reviews that fit that criteria. But no.
I had to go through multiple reviews to determine if "Delicate" had actual spiders in it or if that was just in the credit sequence. By the time I figured it out - I gave up and decided to steer clear.
It's a simple enough thing - just state: "despite all the spider imagery in the credits, there are no spiders in this series", it's used as a metaphor only.

I'm learning to be more selective - and I do read lots of reviews (I like reading them, but they aren't important), but not for the reasons most read reviews? I read reviews to see what other folks think about a show, book, or piece of art. Because their reviews often tell me more about them, how they perceive things and how they think - and that's interesting to me. Rarely does it tell me much about the show itself, but what it was about the show that turned them off or on. And sometimes that last bit - is what lets me know whether the work or show would work for me.

Yes, the spoiler problem! Granted if I know nothing about a series I probably will mind spoilers less than if it's something I already know I want to see. But I have taken to not reading any reviews of anything I know I'm going to try out.

And yes, it is interesting to see people's takes on a show.

It's why I've been avoiding a lot of reviews - the spoiler problem. Some things, it doesn't matter. But most do. I only read them for things that I'm not overly interested in - or not going to try out. For example? I read all of the reviews for Baby Reindeer. And felt validated for steering clear. I tried the first fifteen minutes - nope. Even the trailer for that one, turned me off. I do it a lot for horror films and horror series for the same reasons.

TV Tuesday: Expert Takes

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject