Follow TV Tropes
Normally, I don't find action shows to be very interesting, but I can understand why people like them. They may be fine shows in their own right; they're just not my cup of tea. This, however... I have no idea why anyone likes this, much less thinks it's the best thing Nickelodeon has ever put out. In fact, it's one of the worst cartoons Nick has ever produced, if not THE worst.
Where do I begin with where this show failed? The characters whose development, even, was clichéd? The hero's journey plot we've heard a million times before? The attempts at humor that fall flat 98% of the time?...
But my main problem with this show is that it was BLAND. Ungodly so. In most Nicktoons, being creator-driven stuff, you usually find an interesting art style inspired by something, or an interesting score. Here, however, the art style was directly ripped off from anime with nothing to suggest inspiration, and the musical score was pretty generic itself.
And, as I stated, it was incredibly clichéd. Everything in this show, I felt like I'd already seen before... and done better. Normally, I don't mind clichés. But this show was just cliché after cliché after cliché. Even the subversions were cliché!
I will concede that the animation and voice acting was good. They managed to get some good actors - Mark Hamill, Mae Whitman, Mako, and Grey Delisle among them (although their best roles were in other, better shows). The problem is, though, that the writing just SUCKED. And it's writing that makes or breaks a show. If the writing of a show isn't good, why would you want to watch it? Bad animation can be saved by good writing, but good animation cannot save bad writing no matter how you try.
So this show is ungodly bland. For a Nicktoon, that's pretty awful. I mean, this is the company that gave us "Stimpy's Invention," "Wacky Delly," "Band Geeks" - all near-perfect examples of animation. Nothing can live up to that. Thing is, though, every other Nicktoon is at least somewhat interesting.
I don't think the creators are bad people, either. I mean, they seem like nice guys in their entry in Not Just Cartoons - Nicktoons!, and they seemed like they wanted to make a good show. But they failed at it. They put too little effort into the writing and too much into animation, and that is where it failed.
Yet another review that is complaining and rambles on separate tangents, but does not explained the point of the topic.
I'm wondering if you actually watched the whole thing, or just, like, half of the first season. You repeat that the writing was bad over and over, but you never give one example.
It's almost impressive how you can type so much and yet not say anything at all.
For those of you wondering about the weirdness, baselessness and lack of point of this review, you would better understand if you read the comments on this other review, particularly this line: I don't try to insult people, by the way, but now I think less of this show and its fandom. If you see a review written by me about this show, tell me how I'm wrong all you want. I don't want to hear it. I have heard it all before.
Basically, this like all shows has it's flaws and a varying degree about the opinion of quality and it's reasoning. This on the other hand...this is just a hissy fit due to Opinion Myopia.
Funny, because that was a review that was also critical of the show, but that review actually gave things like... reasons. And support for the reviewer's position.
At first I thought this is an obvious troll review but apparently this guy has a track record of disliking TLA. Usually people come up with some justifications for why they hate something that's popular, which leaves me wondering why this review is nothing but a shallow "it's bad because it's bad and it's bad because I said so".
All I'm reading is a guy repeatedly typing 'bland' without any real elaboration why or how it's bland.
I'm going to be fair and assume this review didn't tackle a lot because it ran out of space, (the 400 word limit does kind of crunch on things) but it would be nice if the reviewer would elaborate on these points. Honestly, I'm just curious why he thinks this stuff about this show. I've never met anyone who doesn't like Avatar, so I'm extremely interested in seeing this guy's reasoning. If you're reading this, I'd love to read a response. Thanks!
Well, James Picard, you're right. I could have elaborated more on this, but space was a factor. Since you asked nicely, I will answer.
One reason I thought it was bland because, as I said, the art style didn't suggest inspiration. It was just, well, a by-the-numbers anime style - I thought the character designers must have been checking off anime art cliches. Compare it to any other Nicktoon, which often have an interesting artistic style - My Life as a Teenage Robot, for example, took inspiration from Art Deco of the 30s but to me it seemed like the creator took the inspiration and used it to create something new. A Nicktoon could also be interesting with its score - like CatDog, which was inspired by country music, or Sponge Bob Square Pants, inspired by the Hawaiian steel guitarist Roy Smeck. Avatar, however, had a pretty generic score.
I also thought it was pretty damned cliché. In a bad way. The hero's journey story by itself has been done so often that there's no variation left, and Avatar didn't bring anything new to the table. As I said, I felt the writers were just checking off a list of things that you normally find in this kind of story. Even the subversions were cliché. I mean, I cannot find one thing in this show that hasn't been done before, and better.
And while I thought the animation and voice acting were good - you got Grey Delisle, how could it not be? - the writing failed, and that is why I relegate it to the bottom of the barrel of Nicktoons.
Your opinion on the art is highly suggestive; the shows you list went for a very simple, child-like artstyle which would have not fit for a show like Avatar. Avatar intended to be more mature, so OF COURSE they went for a more realistic take. Also, bland or not you cannot deny it has some interesting ideas for the designs. I am not a big fan of their designs and even I admit it.
And you are just repeating what you said above, which is criticizing the Hero's journey aspect as a cliché, and not giving any examples of OTHER clichés, not even for the subversions. Develop, otherwise we won't get it.
He asked for elaboration on points. You kinda just repeated yourself.
Are you going to actually develop a point, or are you just gonna repeat "it's cliché" again?
Even for a mature show it wasn't interesting; compare, say, the designs of Batman: The Animated Series. And you do realize that what I was saying was that it wasn't that the art style should have been more cartoony; it's that the art style seemed heavily by-the-numbers.
Please tell me one element of the show that is not, in any way, cliched. I'd like to know, I really would.
It's Been Done, so it's bad. That's all I got out of reading this.
Please tell me one element of the show that is not, in any way, cliched. I'd like to know, I really would.
It's your review; the burden of proof is on you, not us, and so far you haven't given a single specific example of a cliche. The closest you've come is two times, by citing the Hero's Journey, and complaining that the art style is generic, but neither of those are cliches. The Hero's Journey isn't a checklist of events specific to one kind of story, it is the framework into which every single story ever told fits. The Hero's Journey, like "Mary Sue" and "satire," is a term that's been mistakenly thrown around so much since it entered the broader public's lexicon that half the people using it don't even know what it actually means, and think it's just any story with a similar arc to Star Wars.
As for the art, you cite a bunch of other Nicktoons with more creative, abstract art styles, but all those shows were anchored firmly in cartoon worlds. Avatar takes place in a real world, by which I mean real world physics, logic, and other rules apply, and using an abstract style just to be more visually unique would have taken away from the sense of the world as a real place governed by real world rules. Avatar's generic anime style is perfectly serviceable, and works just as well whether a scene is action-packed, quiet and contemplative, serious and dramatic, or even light-hearted or comedic. An abstract style like other Nicktoons wouldn't work nearly as well for the heavier scenes, and a more realistic style like BAS's wouldn't work as well for the lighter scenes. Not every show needs to restylize the wheel to be worth watching.
More realistic? Ya says... Again: Ripped off from anime. They could have easily blended the anime art style with their own art style to create something interesting, but unfortunately, the designs were pretty paint by numbers anime art cliches. And this is kind of deflecting from my point - it isn't that the art style would not fit. It is that these other cartoons managed to take their inspirations and blend it with their own artistic ideas to create something interesting. Here, however, it seems like they just took all these anime cliches and said "Our work is done!" Now, had they taken inspiration from Osamu Tezuka, who managed to do some great tales such as Phoenix - that'd be interesting!
As for cliches, well, the idea of a Chosen One going up against an Evil Empire is cliche. So is the Evil Prince Who Turns Good. The extensive Trope page probably gives you an idea of the number of cliches - it may not be every trope but it is a lot of them. My problem was that it was exactly what you'd expect to see in a story like this; it wasn't anything I hadn't seen before - and done better.
That's the only time I've ever seen "generic" used positively.
And the Hero's Journey framework is how every single story told fits into? How, say, does "Rabbit Fire," or "Stimpy's Invention", or "Wacky Delly" fall into that framework?
Just quickly - "generic anime style". You'd be surprised - anime in general is pretty distinct. Different studios have different styles and different artists, and there are styles that can be traced to the company that made it if you pay attention.
A basic example is Shingeki no Kyojin and Kill la Kill. They look pretty distinct - they draw homage to styles before them from time and again, but the majority of the animation is fairly unique. Specifically, Shingeki's lines are very thick and the show makes extensive use of shading, and Kill la Kill's art style is very bouncy usually. Now, compare both of those to Neon Genesis Evangelion and Kimi Ni Todoke. Evangelion's art style is usually pretty geometric - lots of points and futuristic squares and such - and the characters have facial features reminiscent of most of Gainax's other realistic works, with Shinji and Maya sharing the basic female template of Gainax's 90's work. And Kimi ni Todoke is more realistically proportioned, with characters more firmly rooted in reality, with a special chibi/bouncy artwork for funny moments.
Avatar's artstyle seems to be inspired by Ghibli, but if you put them both side by side there'd be little resemblance. It is, in fact, very unique - stack it against any anime, and you won't find a 100% match. It fits the mold of "anime", but it doesn't actually glean from any particular style. I like how it does noses, and it does well on the character's ears.
You say it's "generic", but if you're familiar with anime you can see that it actually does put a lot of effort into the character designs and the backgrounds.
I do admittedly know that anime has different styles - the anime of the 60s is far different from now. Look at anything by Tezuka. It's far more Disney inspired, more Fleischer Bros. inspired...
I might actually put Avatar in the realm of animesque stuff - shows that look like anime but aren't Japanese, like the stuff produced by Marathon Media; the only difference is, I was entertained by some of their shows.
The art style is the least of Avatar's problems, anyway; most of it is in the writing, which is what makes or breaks a show.
Again, not every show has to invent a new art style is be good. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using a generic style as long as it serves the story, which it does here. The simple fact is that this show is not about the art style, and fixating on it is like fixating on BAS sucking because it wasn't funny enough. Spending time developing a whole new art style for the show would simply have been development time taken away from other elements that were more important to the show's actual focus. The generic anime style works perfectly well for the show's needs, and changing it just for the sake of being different would have detracted from other elements of the show.
Chosen One, Evil Empire, and Heel-Face Turn? Those are cliche the same way a guy in a cape fighting crime is cliche; that's just the genre you're in. Avatar may not be the best Chosen One story I've ever seen, but it's far, far, far from the worst. Just for starters, I typically hate the Chosen One trope, but it works for me in Avatar because it's well established that Aang is just one in a never-ending chain of Chosen Ones, that the position isn't necessarily all that it's cracked up to be, and it's not just an I Win button whenever the writers get themselves in a corner.
The extensive Trope page probably gives you an idea of the number of cliches
I think you need to review Tropes Are Tools, or, heck, the front page of the site: "On the whole, tropes are not clichés."
Alright, let's do Rabbit Fire.
The story opens with Daffy leading Elmer to Bug's burrow, where the hunter to shoot him. This is the "Call to Adventure." Bugs tells Emler that it's duck season, not rabbit season. This is the "Refusal of the Call." This cycle of Call and Refusal is repeated as Bugs and Daffy continue to try to convince Elmer to hunt the other one until Elmer reveals that he's a vegetarian, at which point Bugs accepts the Call, crossing the "First Threshold" by becoming willing to fight back against Elmer, rather than just divert him onto Daffy (who has functioned up until now as the "Threshold Guardian", but now undergoes a Heel-Face Turn). Their attempt to defeat him by disguising themselves as a dog and female hunter (reversing the "Woman as Temptress" stage onto the villain) fails, though, and they fall back into the Call/Refusal cycle until they are given "Supernatual Aid" in the form of the 'Elmer Season' sign, at which point they enter the "Belly of the Whale" and become the hunters themselves.
Rabbit Fire does not complete the Hero's Journey, but not all stories have to. Instead, Rabbit Fire derives much of its comedy from subverting the Hero's Journey though the cycles of Call and Refusal, and the clever ways in which Bugs continuously manages to Refuse the Call by redirecting it onto the antagonistic Threshold Guardian, Daffy, much like fellow trickster gods Loki, Anansi, and Coyote. However, the story ultimately ends with Bugs accepting the Call, and setting out on his journey by hunting Elmer.
Avatar uses an anime-inspired visual style because its setting and characters are based on eastern culture. Asian-derived setting, Asian-derived aesthetic. "Content Dictates Form," as Stephen Sondheim said.
Also, boiling down Prince Zuko's character down to "evil prince who turns good" makes it sound like it's not an arduous three-season character arc full of lots of factors, including the character's conflicting motivations, relationships, and overall psychology. It's an extremely well-done piece of character development, and he's far from the only character on the show with a strong arc.
Uh-huh... "Extremely well done," you sez. But what are his motivations, relationships, psychology? Have we seen them before in anything else?
My problem, I keep saying this, is not with the art style itself; they just didn't make it look interesting enough.
Whyte: I did say not every trope on the page was a cliche.
How about "Stimpy's Invention"? I'd love to know how the hero's journey tale fits there.
Upon some thought - I wonder... Why is it that it's rare to find anyone who hates this show? And those that even just don't think it's the Greatest Cartoon Ever get hit with comments telling them why they're wrong?...
I know there is a guy on YouTube who posted a video saying it's overrated.
Looked interesting enough to me. You aren't substantiating anything you say. You haven't given examples or analysis of any of your claims. You're just going "I says it's bad, therefore it's bad."
How much of the show did you actually watch, by the way? Your comments in the other review indicated you didn't get very far into the show and your entire argument was an attempt to claim that the show wasn't popular or critically acclaimed, when in reality it was both of these things.
I can boil things you like down to their most simplistic levels to write things off, too. Just watch: CatDog, which you mentioned in the comments section of the other review, is essentially a grossout cartoon with an Odd Couple pairing between a friendly idiot and a long-suffering asshole, basically making it a clone of Ren and Stimpy.
I did watch several episodes. They were, admittedly, not in the order I am supposed to watch them. I just did not find them interesting enough to substantiate them as The Greatest Thing Since The Wheel. And if you can't get addicted after 7, 8, maybe 9 episodes, what do you have?
And don't you gimme that bullshit about how "You need to watch more!" I will not watch it in a box. I will not watch it with a fox. I will not watch it in a house. I will not watch it with a mouse. I will not watch it here or there. I will not watch it anywhere.
It's less "you should watch more of it" and more "it probably isn't a good idea to write loads of drivel based on nothing but ill-placed spite, try to pass it off as a review, and get indignant when people call you out on your bullshit."
It isn't actually ill-placed spite. I do have a theory that Avatar destroyed the chance for any other Nicktoon to be accepted, though.
If you claim it to be a whole series review, you do kind of need to watch more if you want to substantiate your claims. Especially considering what you did watch of this arc-based show was out of order.
Well, there kind of wasn't a "a couple of episodes" option. I had to go with what I could do.
Even still, given what I've heard on this wiki about the plot, I still don't find it interesting... Way back when the wiki had a "Complain About Shows You Don't Like" page there were rants on Avatar that I agreed with.
Yes there are! There are "Episode/Issue" and "arc" options! Instead, you did "whole series" review without even acknowledging that anywhere in your review.
You didn't "have" to do anything. As it is, you posted a review of something you weren't qualified to post a review on. What made you think that you were qualified to write a review on it? Generally when we read a review of something, we operate under an implied understanding that the reviewer actually bothered to watch the thing they were reviewing. Your posting a review in this manner is flat-out disingenuous.
Well, thank you for telling me. Wish I had known! I literally had no idea.
Still, "episode/issue" connotates that you watched "an episode", and "arc" connotates you watched an entire arc, which I did not.
I did watch it, as I said. I watched several episodes, some out of order, but I did have a sense of the story. Yet I still was not interested in the show, and I found it to be rather bland.
And "whole series" connotates you watched the whole series, which you did not.
Wouldn't it have made more sense to get a more informed opinion of a show before you reviewed it, via actually watching more of it? As is, you're basing your opinion of the entire series on a vague sense of the story you got from out-of-order episodes.
And if you didn't want to put in the effort to write a more informed review, you probably shouldn't have written a review to start.
Cliche isnt, its not 100% original as you seem to be implying (when it benefits you of course). Even more baffling is this reasoning on tvtropes. It's true that not every story has a heroes Journey, and that is episodic stories, which are the only examples you have given. Your argument is, for example, bad guy turns good has been done before so its cliché and henceford bad. It's quality, method, progression, pacing, drama, twist and turns, etc. are non important (since you havent seen it) which brings the Unfotunate Implication that only Ur Examples are good. Same as last time you seem to be drawing at straws, as others have told you before, yeah there are no perfect pieces of work, everything can be critiqued, but given your overly broad points, it seems you've taken backdraft too far into Opinion Myopia.
MFM: It seems there is simply nothing that will satisfy everyone.
I'm still wanting to know why there are so few critiques of the series. Given that everybody says this is the Greatest Thing Since The Big Bang, it is a wonder there are barely any critiques of it.
Shouldn't Hype Backlash have kicked in?
Not everyone thinks its the greatest thing ever (even on the other review there was debate before you came and shifted the topic to fact refusal) many like me just that its good or ok, its just that Hype Backlash hit you pretty hard.
Around 8 years since its debut, Avatar is still liked by a lot of people. And there's the sequel series Legend of Korra which everyone seems to like, which keeps everything fresh and in the public mind.
The issue is that you've made several unsubstantiated claims, made a review of the entire series after watching less than half a season and fought back with vigor. You should just cut your losses, because in this case you are in the wrong. It's not wrong that you dislike the show, that's an opinion and you're very well entitled to it - but it is wrong that you are passing off your vague, biased views as objective facts and defending them with more baseless drivel about how other cartoons are better.
I also find it funny how you evidently like wacky, episodic cartoons more than you like plot-driven shows. That's just an assumption, actually, but you keep bringing up the same 3 episodes from 3 different franchises and they are all cut from a creative cloth different than Avatar. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's ridiculous that you're attempting to judge a show like Avatar by measuring it up to Ren and Stimpy and Looney Tunes. They are vastly different shows.
I like CatDog, and I especially like Looney Tunes. Don't think I'm bashing them. But you're judging an entire series of something you -don't like- without having seen the entire show. You don't like Avatar, that's fine - but it's mind-bendingly stupid that you'd make a review with like 9 episodes under your belt, an evident bias against the show and a preference for silly, episodic cartoons - indicating that you enjoy shows in a format much different than this one. So you don't like the show - that's okay. You just shouldn't have made a review of it, filled it with vague, borderline baseless claims and then followed it up with more of the same when really, you don't like the show.
You and Welshbie are a compatible pair. You two should go on a date.
OK. So that may be.
Much as I like silly, episodic comedies I do sometimes enjoy fantasy. I'm a devotee of the lesser-known works of Michael Ende (i.e. Anything that isn't The Neverending Story).
And besides... As I have said, if 9 episodes does not get you interested in a show, what else will? I don't get the logic here. 9 episodes should be more than enough to get you hooked... I believe after watching the first four episodes I skipped ahead to see if it got better. It didn't.
I do have to mention that you all are kind of taking me out of context.
The first four episodes... and then you skipped ahead randomly... in a plot-heavy show... and then you complain about the writing being bad. That might work for episodic comedies, but you can't do that in a show like ATLA, because by skipping episodes you're skipping continuous character, relationship, and plot development. Of course events later in the show are going to seem badly done if you skipped all the development leading up to it! Of course Zuko's Heel-Face Turn is going to look cliched if you skipped two and a half seasons of character development! ATLA is a very tightly woven show, with many events later in the series only making sense if you watched the earlier episodes in which the elements were introduced. It's ironic that you're claiming to be taken out of context, because your entire opinion of the show is based on ignoring context.
Saying everyone else made the error is not the best (not to mention a little narcissistic) way to go. The issue is not that you should see, more episodes (no one can or should force you) but that the review and defending coments are disingenuous when you talk about the series as a whole (for example going back to the Zuko bad guy turns good). The best example is that yet again you're saying someting and just leaving it at that, which just gives us a simple reply, the interrogative Ws. " How are we all taking you out of context?"
One of my friends, who watched only a couple of episodes, advised me not to watch Avatar, because it's just another highly cliche'd dumb american cartoon.
Others, who watched it completely, love it.
Others, whom I recommended to watch it, watched it completely and love it.
Some people just like to hate things they don't even know.
Also, "Cliche'd" is the most awfully funny thing you can hear on the TV TROPES
Seriously, each and every one movie/book/series/game/everything is explicitly shown to be just another hundred of tropes and cliches glued together into some edible form.
Things can be good or bad. Cliche'd is not the quality label.
...John Kricfalusi, is that you?
So, your "critique" is that the animation is not very stylized and that you thinks the writing is terrible. However, you can't actually name anything about the writing, beyond the geenealities that could be found on a wiki page. Requests for specifics have been met with more generalities. you're entire claim that "Well, it's all been done" si based on only the broadest strokes. It's like saying about the Venus de Milo "There are tons of statutes of women."
What do I personally find unique? Well, I love the world building. Each style of bending draws upon different martial arts styles that match to the elements and their countries in some of their underlying structure and philosophy. While the individual elemnt has certainly been used before, this was a different way of putting them together and a lot of thought was given to the details. For insatnce, because Toph learned bending from a different source, her style was related but different from most earthbenders.
You need to get your facts straight, if you're going to post something like this as a criticism - 'cuz In 2005, Avatar was nominated for an Annie Award for Best Writing in a Children's Show'.
Even without that nomination, the writing was well above and beyond most of what was airing on Nick, at that time. It's a large part of what helped the series gain notice. For example, how many kid's shows dealt with genocide... in any fashion? Or dealt with its longterm consequences? How many realistically portrayed war - like the scene in "The Avatar State", where Gen. Hong brought Aang down to the infirmary so he could see his injured men and how few of them there were. Then he tells Aang: "they were the lucky ones... tbey came back."
You also toss the word "cliche" around, as if it's inherently a bad thing. The Legend of Zelda is as cliche as it gets, and that series has sold tens of millions over the last 25 years and counting. Gamers love it and are eagerly awaiting the next installment, even now.
Outlaw Star is cliche to the point of being outright wish fulfillment. It didn't do so well in Japan, but in the the west, it's considered to be one of the shows that defined Toonami in the late '90's - and the dvds have sold well enough to prove it.
And while I'll admit that the 'chosen hero vs the evil empire' schtick is a classic in storytelling, you gloss over the finer details that distinguished Avatar from what came before it. Look how, in Book 3, the gaang goes incognito while they're in the Fire Nation, where they soon see that it's people aren't inherently evil, like they first thought. They even befriend some of them - like those kids from "The Headband" episode, or Piandao in "Sokka's Master".
So one of the most lushly detailed, stylistic, anime series (yes, I said "anime" rather than anime inspired), is bland. Yet, you compare it to shows like My Life as a Teenage Robot, which is visually simplistic by comparison?
That's like saying Seirei no Moribito and Princess Mononoke are bland compared to something like Batman The Animate Series. You can't be serious. I'm not knocking you for your preferences in art styles, I honestly don't see how you can call Avatar "bland", when it's one of the most visually stunning series created and has been repeatedly noted as such.
Not to mention all the choreography and motion capture work that went into scripting the show's fight scenes, or how the cast and crew actually studied martial arts to ensure each of the fighting styles/bending forms were being accurately portrayed. Rather than have the characters just throw random kicks and punches and call it 'martial arts', like most otner shows do.
Or how Bryke visited various locations to study the architecture and clothing styles for the sake of authenticity, and how they hired a well known Chinese calligrapher so all the sign posts, fliers, and wanted posters in te series actually said what the characters were reading. Instead of just putting random scribbles on paper, like other shows do.
I gotta ask, what're you basing this on? Specifically. I get that you don't like the series and think it doesn't deserve all the accolades and attention it's gotten, but is that really all this is?
Another example: The Lego Movie. Everything about it is cliche out the wazoo, yet it seems on track to be the best-received animated feature of the year.
If only there were a way to edit comments. I somehow missed the "d" in "animated".
The sheer amount of trollery summarized:
I'm going to be completely honest with you: I thought this review was awful. I have nothing against someone not liking a show but when all I see is biased bullshit and assumptions to a show for a review that's supposed to be of an ENTIRE SERIES and you don't even bother to watch the whole series IN ORDER to validate your opinion (according to the comments), that is the work of a person who clearly has no respect for anyone's intelligence. The way you worded your opinion also annoyed the living shit out of me. You use the word "cliche" like a kid who's learned a new word and keeps repeating it over and over again until it loses all meaning.
Also, the fact you compared Avatar to cartoony and comedic episodic shows and DON'T elaborate on how these are better (Wacky Delly baffles me as that was meant to be INTENTIONALLY SHITTY, I think Band Geeks is a great episode for Spongebob but I think it's too jarring to compare and Stimpy Invention as much as I like that episode but I think it's also too jarring) irritates me because of the MASSIVE amounts of They Just Didn't Care since you've stated you've only seen a few episodes.
My point is that I have nothing against you not liking a show, but if you're going to make a review for a show that says 'whole series review', then actually watch the whole damn show IN ORDER so we can have CONTEXT and you won't get called out on bullshit all because you were too lazy to do anything about it and don't be surprised if people do call you out because of your biased joke of a "review" that words it's statements as if it's fact which I find infuriating!
I've seen you mention that space was an issue in this review (and I will agree that the 400-word limit is bad). However, then why didn't you try to focus on one or two things and elaborate on them? When I write a review (positive or negative), I write about the two or three biggest things in the work. Is the pacing horrendous? I'll have a paragraph about that. Do the backgrounds look beautiful? I'll include that. Is one character just a little off from his previous characterization? Too minor to bother mentioning.
Don't spread your critique too wide or it won't have enough content to be a critique.
I meant to say 'Stimpy's Invention'. We need an edit tool for review comments.
We need a delete tool for review comments.
Might as well flag this for being an obvious troll.
@Aldo 930, did you at least watch The Storm? Because if you didn\'t you should. You don’t have to, or course, but I feel that if you don\'t like The Storm, you\'re not going to like the rest of it.
^ This review is like six years old...
Leave a Comment:
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?