WTB a real review (ep4)

[rdpillz]

Originally Posted by vpr

We, as the fans, were hammering the staff about the quirkiness and immaturity of the review segments. For me, I think it was stepped up during this section and felt more mature [to me]. They still seemed to enjoy themselves, and and a nice pacing, nothing seemed dragged out. Now we just need to work on that girl who's in Japan -- her voice over work was a little...over-acted. Although I did enjoy that segment! Hope there are more like that.

It's unfair for them to have to watch the whole series, as they can be extremely long. TRS often doesn't finish games, TV Series (James May's Toy Stories comes to mind), or even the comics they read. Diggnation doesn't even pre-read the stories before the show. The Co-Op people have admitted to not "beating" or even playing a version of the game during their "reviews" of games. Don't come on here demanding AnimeTV to do something that other shows on this network aren't even doing.

They described the show like an anime version of 'Dexter'. If you don't know what Dexter is, there are plenty of places that you can go to read about that. Although I've never watched Dexter, I know what it's about, therefor I knew what Monster was about. Since Dexter isn't my cup of tea, mixed with all 4 people's common opinion of the show, plus the uninteresting video of Monster, I found enough to warrant a "healthy" review.

Finally, reviewers are simply people who give their opinions to the public. It's impossible for a reviewer to satisfy everyone's personal expectations. This is why we have so many different type of reviewers. You find one that you tend to agree with, so when they give you their (notice the proper use of "their") opinion you will most likely agree with it since you've agreed with their past reviews. Do the same with this show, find 1 of the review staff who you tend to agree with and listen to what they have to say. If you don't agree with any of them, then maybe this show isn't for you purely on a review standpoint. If you're entertained by it, watch it for the entertainment. I'm sure the staff would be the first to tell you that their reviews aren't the end all, be all, of reviews.

After reading all the comments I am starting to wish that I could go back and rephrase my initial post.

The Central issue that I tried to bring up was the lack of a synopsis in the beginning of the review. If I could I would rename the topic to "WTB a Synopsis"

The opinions of the reviewers were fine, sort of (not the topic of this discussion), but should of came after a proper synopsis in the beginning of the review. Saying that it is like dexter and that is good enough is just wrong in my opinion. And Laura said about 2 words to describe it halfway through the review, it was easy to miss, I didn't catch it till my second time watching the segment.

Sure the reviewers are just regular people but they are here to do a job. And like any job you expect it to be done in a professional manner. Just because they can enjoy their job it doesn't mean that its ok for them to be lazy at it. Of course they are still new to this and have a lot to learn but they won't learn anything if all you do is give them mindless praise and accept a low standard of quality from them. The first few episodes are the episodes that should be the most criticized, if they are this heavily criticized at episode 50, I would say there is a problem.

Read the synopsis posted by Foshi in his topic "Monster - a slow but good burn", that is what I felt was missing from this review. That is what this thread is about. At least initially, then Pantsless brought up the excellent point about not being able to formulate an opinion based on the review, which is what I think the objective of their reviews should be.

[animetvroy]

Originally Posted by rdpillz

After reading all the comments I am starting to wish that I could go back and rephrase my initial post.

The Central issue that I tried to bring up was the lack of a synopsis in the beginning of the review. If I could I would rename the topic to "WTB a Synopsis"
.

I won't even try to defend my professionalism, my posting here can attest to that notion.

I will say that Cristina Vee's introduction to the review (Lists primary protag, antag, length of series, place to watch the series) coupled with the trailer seemed to frame the review well enough. Now if you wanted a better synopsis I can understand that better than you saying you wanted a review. The information was there, if you wanted more information, then I feel you.

Vpr. wow, when you want to drive the idea home, you do it in spades.

Again we love to hear what you think, and we will try our best to improve as we go on.

[rdpillz]

Originally Posted by animetvroy

I will say that Cristina Vee's introduction to the review (Lists primary protag, antag, length of series, place to watch the series) coupled with the trailer seemed to frame the review well enough.

I just went back to watch that part of the video, I must admit I must of not been paying attention to that part my first time through, the second time I only reminded back to the beginning of the anime clip. This kind of brings me back to me issues with the separation between the hosts and the pundits. Just causes problems to try and force this format. That being said, the review still did leave us wanting.

[animetvroy]

Originally Posted by rdpillz

I just went back to watch that part of the video, I must admit I must of not been paying attention to that part my first time through, the second time I only reminded back to the beginning of the anime clip. This kind of brings me back to me issues with the separation between the hosts and the pundits. Just causes problems to try and force this format. That being said, the review still did leave us wanting.

Ok, no problem, now that you know it was there, and it was lacking for you and your friends. I am not sure if you watch with others, but I am sorry that you feel it was lacking and I appreciate your input.

[rdpillz]

Ya, egg on my face, I feel kinda embarrassed about making such a big issue out of there being 'no' synopsis. But I still stand by what I said about Foshi's synopsis, and i still think each review should start with something similar. And the issue about not being able to build an opinion of the anime based on the review is still valid.

[snorlaxxx]

Originally Posted by vpr

Finally, reviewers are simply people who give their opinions to the public. It's impossible for a reviewer to satisfy everyone's personal expectations. This is why we have so many different type of reviewers. You find one that you tend to agree with, so when they give you their (notice the proper use of "their") opinion you will most likely agree with it since you've agreed with their past reviews. Do the same with this show, find 1 of the review staff who you tend to agree with and listen to what they have to say. If you don't agree with any of them, then maybe this show isn't for you purely on a review standpoint. If you're entertained by it, watch it for the entertainment. I'm sure the staff would be the first to tell you that their reviews aren't the end all, be all, of reviews.

I'm the staff and I cannot tell a lie... my reviews ARE the end all, be all...

you know I'm joking. whether or not how the thread comes out i do think it's beneficial to us to "get" our viewers. The questions posed that I think are the best to help me out are..."Is it okay to not watch the entire series to warrant praise or dissatisfaction?" and also, "Is it my plan to have folks kinda get to know what I like in anime and if they think they like what I would like than to follow my meager advice?"

I think during monster, i was hoping for the latter. Yeah call it "lazybones syndrome" or my spider sense was tingling that i felt it was going nowhere. I don't think any of the reviewers have been on enough panels to have people know exactly which of us they would believe to be gospel truth if one of us just said "don't watch this show if you like what i like."
It didn't go without saying that this series IS hugely uber popular and the spoilers that i spoke of initially were left on the cutting room floor at the end.
I will pray in the future that we don't have to review anything over 50 eps. Good or bad it's a long haul in addition to watching my regular shows so that I can watch the whole reviewed title. I promise to not let anyone down again-- well at least in the respect of not watching the whole thing. (no matter how harmful the show may be to my sanity) <oi! i just can't stop bombing that show> sorry.

[rdpillz]

All the pundits were negative towards this anime, I think someone could of played the part of the devils advocate to talk about the animes redeeming features, the whole world doesn't hate this anime, just the 4 pundits who decided to review it. Laura did mention that she liked the art style, that it was a bit different but that is the only positive thing that is said in the whole review. So this review was skewed.

I went back to watch the review again just so i can respond knowing that I'm not makein shit up again.

[snorlaxxx]

we all that sat on the panel were not hugely impressed by the monster... but take into consideration that we all watched it separately and didn't talk about it until the show started.
we all formed our opinions separately and are big enough personalities to attempt to defend a show we really like or hate on. i remember a long time ago everyone bombing on Trinity Blood and i wasnt on the panel. i would have tooth and nailed them in defense of that show being something enjoyable at least to me. i do not remember (and no im not watching the archive footage to see how it ultimately turned out) but im pretty sure they hated on Trinity Blood altogether and i wished i was on the couch to give it a fair shake. But due to the fact everyone watched TB on their own and formed their own opinions, i had to let it go that it would have been a different review if i sat in on it. win some, lose some was the lame phrase i took from that.
in the end this happened to be the case with monster. different folks on the couch may have been a different review. i mean the only (and im grasping here) redeeming thing about the show to me, was that it was a psychological thriller which is not the usual jell-o mold vehicle to storytell via anime. so it was "different". To me this kind of different was not a good different. so thats why i loaded up the Enola Gay.
debating the worthiness of monster to a throng of fans who enjoy it is a sisyphean task. after the show i knew full well WE, not monster would be panned for not enjoying it. it was like being the only person in the i-dont-like-haruhi-club. ive been there.
But i just wanted to let everyone know we all looked at it by ourselves and are not influenced by the others. i think thats why we laughed when we realized we were all in the same boat hence the "rowboating". it surprised even me frankly.

[snorlaxxx]

watch it anyway? i mean if you dont agree=then join the throng. i wont think you are conformist at all, i will think you just didnt agree with our individual findings (and thats great!) id rather have people tell me they watched it and either agree or disagree anyway than not watch it. so watch the monster...watch it and get back to me. now im interested. oh and grab twelve bags of microwavable popcorn and 18 liters of mountain dew. (darn i just cant stop hating on it <its like now i feel compelled to bust on it every time i can just for funsies>).

[rdpillz]

Can understand that you all watch it individually, but isn't it possible to discuss who should be on a panel before hand to make sure that there are pundits for and pundits against an anime that you would be reviewing to make sure that the opinions are varied. Or at the very least review each others notes before the episode.