Seconded. All her articles have left me with a bad taste. This one doesn't help.Mysnomer said:Oh, another Elizabeth article. Ugh, but it's actually about something that interests me, oh well, I guess I'll endure it. Don't know what it is, something about you rubs me the wrong way.
Commenting on an article I found to be poor = crying.Shamus Young said:I love deconstructionist humor so much. This article was tremendous fun.
Post-article fanboy crying was a nice bonus.
Reverse Counter Fan Boy... ACTIVATE!!!Shamus Young said:I love deconstructionist humor so much. This article was tremendous fun.
Post-article fanboy crying was a nice bonus.
yeah the retcon version... I wonder how far Batman, as an icon, would have gotten if that was his orignal origin, ... and even 'if' your point had merit, at least he turned against them in the end.. he didn't hang out with them.HG131 said:Batman was trained by murderers, thieves and other not so good people.Fumbleumble said:The show completely lost me as soon as were were supposed to be rooting for a 'super hero' who's mentors were as bunch of bank robbing thugs who would happliy cut his fingers off, kill him then dump him in the desert if hadn't had a convienently easy way for them to rob even more banks while pointing shot guns at innocent bystanders.
My personal idea of a superhero is someone who takes people like that out.
Yeah, it's weird, normally I do to. But, I dunno, maybe it's because she's picking on a new show, which I feel is unfair. If you go back to stuff that aired years ago, or things that should be evaluated in a vacuum (like a videogame), I think the snark works, because you are mocking a something that is fully realized. It's akin to trading friendly banter with a long time buddy. "Hey, remember that time when you had an episode constructed of nothing but bad cliches because the media watchdogs were on your case?" etc. etc. But in this instance, she's brutally ripping the pilot of a brand new property to shreds. That's more like kicking the crutches out from under the cripple and saying it's his fault he couldn't run away fast enough.Shamus Young said:I love deconstructionist humor so much. This article was tremendous fun.
Post-article fanboy crying was a nice bonus.
Pretty much this. I enjoyed the article on the Simpson's a while back particularly for this reason. Mocking an established franchise is perfectly fine. Even the mocking of GFWL. But this article was just done poorly. Some people are taking as a serious account of the pilot episode, adn will refuse to watch it. As a target audience (we're a bunch of geeks. We're (the Escapist) expected to watch things like the cape) doesn't tune in, the show is likely to get canceled before it can get better.Mysnomer said:Yeah, it's weird, normally I do to. But, I dunno, maybe it's because she's picking on a new show, which I feel is unfair. If you go back to stuff that aired years ago, or things that should be evaluated in a vacuum (like a videogame), I think the snark works, because you are mocking a something that is fully realized. It's akin to trading friendly banter with a long time buddy. "Hey, remember that time when you had an episode constructed of nothing but bad cliches because the media watchdogs were on your case?" etc. etc. But in this instance, she's brutally ripping the pilot of a brand new property to shreds. That's more like kicking the crutches out from under the cripple and saying it's his fault he couldn't run away fast enough.Shamus Young said:I love deconstructionist humor so much. This article was tremendous fun.
Post-article fanboy crying was a nice bonus.
In summation: This article feels less like a humorous commentary and more like vicious bullying. But, hey, you're pretty good at this stuff Shamus, why don't you teach her the ropes.