What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
- Yukaphile
- Overlord
- Posts: 8778
- Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:14 am
- Location: Rabid Posting World
- Contact:
Re: What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
Well, if you think the show is as good as ten years ago, I don't think anyone is wrong to believe that. I just think it's better in some ways, worse in others. As all things are. And I prefer the Silver Age to the Golden Age, if that helps?
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
- BridgeConsoleMasher
- Overlord
- Posts: 11630
- Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am
Re: What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
To be honest, it seems you're mostly concerned with whether or not he yells at the production team for latent or overt forms of misogyny and bigotry. Which is fine of course, but feels a little iso-tonal for gold/silver determination.
..What mirror universe?
- Yukaphile
- Overlord
- Posts: 8778
- Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:14 am
- Location: Rabid Posting World
- Contact:
Re: What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
Not at all. As I'd said, my favorite era was 2014, because of the KOTOR review, Romulan Summer, and just how amazing many of the reviews from that year were.
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
- BridgeConsoleMasher
- Overlord
- Posts: 11630
- Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am
Re: What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
OK but I'm keeping an eye on you Yuka.
..What mirror universe?
- clearspira
- Overlord
- Posts: 5653
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 12:51 pm
Re: What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
Oh, hell yes.BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:26 pm To be honest, it seems you're mostly concerned with whether or not he yells at the production team for latent or overt forms of misogyny and bigotry. Which is fine of course, but feels a little iso-tonal for gold/silver determination.
Re: What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
Yes.
I don't really consider the reviews to have a Golden Age. I think they've just been fun for the entire time. Although my personal favorites are the My Little Pony reviews, Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, and Avatar the Last Airbender, I just plain think all the reviews are great.
Except Miracle Day, but NOTHING SF Debris did could salvage that pile of eldritch horror level awfulness. That's the fault of the material, and distinctly NOT SF Debris.
I don't really consider the reviews to have a Golden Age. I think they've just been fun for the entire time. Although my personal favorites are the My Little Pony reviews, Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, and Avatar the Last Airbender, I just plain think all the reviews are great.
Except Miracle Day, but NOTHING SF Debris did could salvage that pile of eldritch horror level awfulness. That's the fault of the material, and distinctly NOT SF Debris.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:38 pm
Re: What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
Your premise is flawed. Chuck's quality is still high.
He IS however past just about all the standout episodes Trek has to offer. He's done very close to 500 episodes now (somewhere in the 490's with a rough count) out of 755. About 2/3 of everything. Of everything Trek at this point, what's left are mostly middleground forgettable episodes that nobody felt compelled to request for the last 11 years. So that material in particular is just kind of there, through no fault of Chuck's... but all the other stuff is still really solid.
His big digs into the background of Star Wars, his history of comics,his runthroughs of bioware rpgs. going over other tv series he hasn't covered at quite that length, all the films stuff and research? It's all great, a lot of it his best work to date. He's not quite as constantly angry at Voyager anymore, and that's a good thing, thats a shtick that wears thin pretty fast, as Angry Video Game Nerd showcases pretty well. And even the old angry videos are so interspersed at this point you can't really tell them apart anyway since it wasn't exactly sequential.
If I have to point to a specific golden period, in October 2015 he did Terminator, Robocop, Back to the Future, and Ghostbusters, so that was a really solid particular month. But nothing I'd split and define an era over.
He IS however past just about all the standout episodes Trek has to offer. He's done very close to 500 episodes now (somewhere in the 490's with a rough count) out of 755. About 2/3 of everything. Of everything Trek at this point, what's left are mostly middleground forgettable episodes that nobody felt compelled to request for the last 11 years. So that material in particular is just kind of there, through no fault of Chuck's... but all the other stuff is still really solid.
His big digs into the background of Star Wars, his history of comics,his runthroughs of bioware rpgs. going over other tv series he hasn't covered at quite that length, all the films stuff and research? It's all great, a lot of it his best work to date. He's not quite as constantly angry at Voyager anymore, and that's a good thing, thats a shtick that wears thin pretty fast, as Angry Video Game Nerd showcases pretty well. And even the old angry videos are so interspersed at this point you can't really tell them apart anyway since it wasn't exactly sequential.
If I have to point to a specific golden period, in October 2015 he did Terminator, Robocop, Back to the Future, and Ghostbusters, so that was a really solid particular month. But nothing I'd split and define an era over.
Last edited by RobbyB1982 on Sat Feb 09, 2019 9:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
I liked his review. I got to see how it ended without having to watch the rest of the awful thing. I watched the show up until she burned. It was getting worse and worse and that that point I just gave up.Nevix wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 8:46 am Yes.
I don't really consider the reviews to have a Golden Age. I think they've just been fun for the entire time. Although my personal favorites are the My Little Pony reviews, Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, and Avatar the Last Airbender, I just plain think all the reviews are great.
Except Miracle Day, but NOTHING SF Debris did could salvage that pile of eldritch horror level awfulness. That's the fault of the material, and distinctly NOT SF Debris.
Re: What do you consider the Golden Age of SF Debris reviews?
Oh, indeed. The review itself is definitely good.Sir Will wrote: ↑Sat Feb 09, 2019 8:41 pmI liked his review. I got to see how it ended without having to watch the rest of the awful thing. I watched the show up until she burned. It was getting worse and worse and that that point I just gave up.Nevix wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 8:46 am Yes.
I don't really consider the reviews to have a Golden Age. I think they've just been fun for the entire time. Although my personal favorites are the My Little Pony reviews, Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, and Avatar the Last Airbender, I just plain think all the reviews are great.
Except Miracle Day, but NOTHING SF Debris did could salvage that pile of eldritch horror level awfulness. That's the fault of the material, and distinctly NOT SF Debris.
I can understand dropping the series. It was literally hard for me to watch the Miracle Day review because of how miserable and awful that miniseries was.