Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,628
Having listened to Helen O'Hara talk extensively on the Empire podcast for a decade, I can tell you she is not paid to give good reviews.
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (Prime)
- Thread starter LiE
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Oct 2022
- Posts
- 1,157
- Location
- Brum town
It's nonsense. I'm not saying reviewers being 'paid pff' has never happened, but this idea that contrasting reviews can't exist simultaneously without there being a network of back handers is twaddle.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 2,114
S2 E3 thoughts (Spoilers)
Uh, more bad physics. When the horse kicked the Orc away into the tree and impaled them, the CGI was bad, zero physics to it. I get that as a show you shouldn't have so realistic physics, then perhaps they could have done something else with that scene instead. But yeah. Easy thing to not factor in, but it can make or break scenes easily. Something that was front and center like that really needed that extra momentum (physics) thrown in so it becomes less like an obvious CGI scene and more like a shot of a real scene (which is what the series is aiming for).
Very weird seeing a Troll (?, Ogre?) speak using common/English. Would have expected that they continue using the dark language and just have subs. Don't hate, don't love. Just feels jarring as I think it's the first we've seen any of them talk.
You know what? There's actually a scene/line very similar to this in this episode!
Proving again that the Elrond/Durin story is where their main/best story tellers are at setting stuff up. At least some stuff is consistent and I'm happy it's this lot. Although currently Disa being drawn into the story and also through desire and hubris to "save their poeple" and being open about the use of magic rings to do so without reading the fine print so to say is very off given how level headed she was written prior. Desperation causing lack of logic and change of attitude? Or drama for drama sake? Better exposition could have made it better I feel so we all know. I don't think they're going to come back to why the change in Disa over this PIS (Plot Induced Stupidity).
I'm starting to see a pattern here. There's no major set pieces in this world. Everywhere a change of location happens, titlecards are put up instead of it being obvious we have reached "somewhere". Back in the trilogy, everywhere you went, if it was a major location, you could tell. Here, it's the same random landscape after landscape, and unless if there's an obvious identifiable landmark, there's no way to tell that it wasn't just another part of the same forest/mountain range.
The ranged combat in S2 is definitely better, you can see appropriate in world physics, momentum, stagger, etc all of that. Melee is definitely where it needs more work or effort to control by the sfx teams, can't let the directors control it, as relying solely on CGI gets you unrealisitc combat. It's better with Arondir (the elf) here, but it's clear the actors more well trained physically and the one slashed by them was experienced, as they were able to show what would happen even without a real blade in action. Good stunt work team put in for that scene selling it so well - it wasn't perfect, but far better than any other melee combat in the first three episodes.
Just noticed that the queen of Numenor hasn't been given blind acting guidance. She's starring straight out constantly instead of the eyes occasional jitter around that truly blind people would have behaved with their eyes. Not a major thing, as it's not a simple thing to replicate. Also probably lost on the majority who have no knowledge of it so probably would be wasted in giving training for.
Very weird seeing a Troll (?, Ogre?) speak using common/English. Would have expected that they continue using the dark language and just have subs. Don't hate, don't love. Just feels jarring as I think it's the first we've seen any of them talk.
You know what? There's actually a scene/line very similar to this in this episode!
Proving again that the Elrond/Durin story is where their main/best story tellers are at setting stuff up. At least some stuff is consistent and I'm happy it's this lot. Although currently Disa being drawn into the story and also through desire and hubris to "save their poeple" and being open about the use of magic rings to do so without reading the fine print so to say is very off given how level headed she was written prior. Desperation causing lack of logic and change of attitude? Or drama for drama sake? Better exposition could have made it better I feel so we all know. I don't think they're going to come back to why the change in Disa over this PIS (Plot Induced Stupidity).
I'm starting to see a pattern here. There's no major set pieces in this world. Everywhere a change of location happens, titlecards are put up instead of it being obvious we have reached "somewhere". Back in the trilogy, everywhere you went, if it was a major location, you could tell. Here, it's the same random landscape after landscape, and unless if there's an obvious identifiable landmark, there's no way to tell that it wasn't just another part of the same forest/mountain range.
The ranged combat in S2 is definitely better, you can see appropriate in world physics, momentum, stagger, etc all of that. Melee is definitely where it needs more work or effort to control by the sfx teams, can't let the directors control it, as relying solely on CGI gets you unrealisitc combat. It's better with Arondir (the elf) here, but it's clear the actors more well trained physically and the one slashed by them was experienced, as they were able to show what would happen even without a real blade in action. Good stunt work team put in for that scene selling it so well - it wasn't perfect, but far better than any other melee combat in the first three episodes.
Just noticed that the queen of Numenor hasn't been given blind acting guidance. She's starring straight out constantly instead of the eyes occasional jitter around that truly blind people would have behaved with their eyes. Not a major thing, as it's not a simple thing to replicate. Also probably lost on the majority who have no knowledge of it so probably would be wasted in giving training for.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 41,255
- Location
- Cornwall
When people like the Braindead Drinker does it, do you really expect any better from his devout followers?
Empire Online - completely dependent on the film and TV industry for revenue via advertising and for access to keep their dinosaur business model alive. Not surprising they gave Amazon an overwhelmingly positive and gushing review is it?
Last edited:
You haven't watched it (The Acolyte) becuase you thought it looked crap - so where does the critics 78% score come from?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,628
Mine was just a feeling based on a trailer, nothing else.
They have at least watched the show, which allows them to give their opinion.
And bear in mind that the critics were shown 4/8 episodes of 'The Acolyte' when they reviewed it.
At least ROP season 2 the critics have seen the whole thing
They have at least watched the show, which allows them to give their opinion.
And bear in mind that the critics were shown 4/8 episodes of 'The Acolyte' when they reviewed it.
At least ROP season 2 the critics have seen the whole thing
Last edited:
So they watched half of it (plenty to make a solid judgement on) and were still overwhelmingly wrong?
They're not very good at this are they?
Is this a thread about the show or ******* ratings on some website?! I’ve no idea why this thread can’t just be left to those who watch the show (whether they enjoy it or not) and not descend into the previous crap fest the first season resulted in.
It's a data set that makes no sense, critics 78% - audience 18%?
Any basic understand of statistics tells you something isn't right.
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Oct 2022
- Posts
- 1,157
- Location
- Brum town
Makes perfect sense so me. The audience score is skewed by people who've likely not seen the show and are downvoting on mass just to make some weird political statement about the shows supposed 'wokeness'.
It's baffling to me that people are so willing to believe in mass critic pay offs, but not the general public tanking scores just to send some kind of message about it's content. Not saying you have to share those opinions to give the show a low score, but we know for a fact that happens. We have little to no proof that there's some shady, industry backed cartel funding positive reviews.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 2,114
I dunno, I was just making my (obviously spoilery) thoughts after watching it (as I did in the first season and I'm glad to see improvements were made in the flawed areas from last season), which I'm sure many haven't as it was dropped 8am UK time today unlike before (Season 1) at midnight when others can catch it between then. I'm fortunate enough to be able to watch it as I'm an unpaid carer, so I can just catch it after I'm done with the morning routine for the one I'm caring for. Most others are likely at work or heading to work, so wouldn't be watching "live" like I was.
It also makes perfect sense to me that the score is skewed by critics who need to keep their ad revenue and access flowing. It also makes perfect sense to me that a show that got no viewers and got cancelled (Acolyte) is also the a show the critics gave a very high score to. There's also the other side of tanking review scorea and that's psortive review bombing - so that evens it self out.
It's obvious that either these critics don't know what they're watching as the show was cancelled, or they are invested financially, if indirectly, or of course they're simply just activists and support DEI politics (here's a clue - it's both)
It is baffling to me that people can't see the connection between keeping your paymasters sweet and good reviews. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours is a tale of as old as time.
Heaven knows what you'll do when you find out what goes in sauasages...
Last edited:
Without joining the
Most people are fully aware that big companies 'pay' for good reviews - you only have to look at the recently released Star Wars Outlaws and how disney gave some sweet Disneyland trips and merch etc to youtubers/'influencers'/etc in exchange for high scores.It also makes perfect sense to me that the score is skewed by critics who need to keep their ad revenue and access flowing. It also makes perfect sense to me that a show that got no viewers and got cancelled (Acolyte) is also the a show the critics gave a very high score to. There's also the other side of tanking review scorea and that's psortive review bombing - so that evens it self out.
It's obvious that either these critics don't know what they're watching as the show was cancelled, or they are invested financially, if indirectly, or of course they're simply just activists and support DEI politics (here's a clue - it's both)
It is baffling to me that people can't see the connection between keeping your paymasters sweet and good reviews. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours is a tale of as old as time.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 8,077
While there are plenty of things I could criticize it it for, proto-hobbits aside sets and costumes are not one of them its clearly had money spent on it and Numenor looks great.
I disagree both costumes and sets were rubbish.
It is what it is, it's a positive review by critics for a series that no-one watched, and that unceremoniously got ****-canned. Clearly hugely out of step with the quality of the show, and the audience reaction. Why?
Are they no good at their jobs?
Or are they biased?