- Joined
- Jun 28, 2022
- Messages
- 5,003
One wonders, my precious, one wonders.That little fluff there under the branch.... is that a little beard you're growing now?

One wonders, my precious, one wonders.That little fluff there under the branch.... is that a little beard you're growing now?
It's not just that Twitter will attack them, the studios can also pull early reviewing if the keep getting reviews they don't like or are detrimental to their income. They'll find critics more favourable instead and you'll be left only giving reviews AFTER the show or movie premiers. That's a death knell to a critic, especially professional ones.I don't know whether the proffesional ciritcs actually like the shows they are endorsing or not, but in any case, they can't (or think they can't) afford to ciritize anything with Strong Female Lead Characters or Diversity Cast (SFLC/DC).
They don't need to be, but a vague proximity would be nice.I guess I see the written word and the TV series as similar but they don't need to be exactly the same.
They wouldn't need to. You focus on the forging of the Rings of Power and the War of the Elves and Sauron first, then you only need to worry about the Elves, a handful of dwarves, and Minastir (at the end of the War). Then you jump ahead to the end of the 2nd Age and you trot out the human cast they largely have now: Míriel, Pharazôn, Amandil, Elendil, Isildur, Anarion.For example, RoP compressed the timeline so that they didn't need to have a new cast of humans each week.
How do you feel they have caught the essence of the story, though? There's no Annatar teaching the elves. No Celebrimbor and Sauron. Both major parts of the forging of the Rings.Their goal was to tell the essence of the story, not an exact retelling.
I don't doubt that. But there are other shills active on the Internet, serving a clientele that craves, to very likely simplify, "likes". There are endless "ratings" sites, for example, for tourist destinations. There are zillions of homepages of people, the subculture of "influencers" at the forefront (overlap with "ratings" here), but also those of people professionally interested in media attention.Not a few professional reviewers are shills.
I think the majority of "Pro reviewers" on Rotten Tomatoes are shilling to some extent, which would account for the great disparity of ratings between the pros and the proles for RoP; but also for many other movies that have a similar disparity of ratings.
(The Pros know what side their bread is buttered on)
Put another way, one has to be "less than honest" in order to be paid.Well, if you keep giving negative scores the studios aren't really incentivized to give you previews and they'll stop handing them out to you. So to some degree reviewers are "encouraged" to give at least decent reviews or their ability to do their job will dry up.
Or make their job work regardless. Accept that your review will have to come out after the film has a general public release.Put another way, one has to be "less than honest" in order to be paid.
An honorable/honest person would find work that doesn't require him to lie.
Yep...but a lot of reviews I have read were "after the release" and it was s till a good review.Or make their job work regardless. Accept that your review will have to come out after the film has a general public release.
Yeah but news and news-adjacent jobs have become a game of who can get out first.Yep...but a lot of reviews I have read were "after the release" and it was s till a good review.
I don't mean the reviewer gushed over the film, just that it was a thoughtful review,.