Reviews that didn't age well.

[Sacrosanct]

For those of you with a copy of the archive, it's in Dragon #63, written by Gary Gygax himself. And, perhaps most egregious of all, he compares The Sword and the Sorcerer favorably to Conan.
So, yeah, THAT didn't age well.

Tim Kask did a review of the animated Rankin/Bass Hobbit movie and lambasted it as well. However, in Tim's defense, there really wasn't any other media about Middle Earth except the books, so that's the only comparison he had. And he was an adult when the movie came out. I'd bet most people who loved that animated movie (like me) were kids when it came out. Tim just wasn't the target demographic and was expecting something faithful to the books.

 

[Deset Gled]

While not technically a review, I do think this reaction to the release of Star Wars: Attack of Clones has aged poorly.

Archived Comic #305 – Dork Tower

www.dorktower.com

I get it. AotC had a lot of serious fan service moments. Anakin and Obi Wan fighting side by side, Bobs Fett, etc. I walked out of the theater at 2:30 AM, and the only thing on my mind was thinking how cool the lightsaber duel with Yoda was. It took a day or two to look back and reflect on how darn goofy the whole movie was (especially the lightsaber duel that I loved when I first saw it).

Aliens Vs Predator was the same way. Bad addition to the franchise, goofy story, but lots of nerd lead-up and a high enough budget/production values that you walked out of the theater happy and it took awhile for the disappointment to settle in.

I guess this is a long about way of saying that sometimes the immediate emotional reaction you have to a movie isn't always the same as how you feel about it in the long run. There's no shame in writing a movie review that reflects that.

The Guardian article highlighted how boring as shell Good Omens is to randos, none of those quotes were the least bit arousing. I’m with Joe’s review. I know that’s not popular but the books pretend at profundity, and are overrated by genre fans. I allow that others love, but, fine hate me, boring, not new, affected pedestrian stuff.

I can't see enough of Queenan's review to know if it's accurate or not, but I will admit that I find Good Omens to be one of the most over-rated novels I've ever read. It's not bad, per se. I just find it very average for the genre.

 

[Mannahnin]

Tim Kask did a review of the animated Rankin/Bass Hobbit movie and lambasted it as well. However, in Tim's defense, there really wasn't any other media about Middle Earth except the books, so that's the only comparison he had. And he was an adult when the movie came out. I'd bet most people who loved that animated movie (like me) were kids when it came out. Tim just wasn't the target demographic and was expecting something faithful to the books.

Although in retrospect, even as an adult the Rankin/Bass production did more justice and was much more true to the story than the big budget Hollywood epic rendition we eventually got.

 

[Ryujin]

I thought that I remembered "Galaxy Quest" getting some bad reviews when it first came out, however, all that i can find now are positive ones. It definitely got short shrift by the studio, because they billed it completely wrong in their advertising, and I vaguely remember some critics complaining that it wasn't what was on the tin.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

If you know of other reviews that have aged poorly, and I know there are many out there, please add them to this thread.

The Um, Actually game show on Dropout (and early seasons on YouTube) has a recurring feature of trying to guess what geek movie is being reviewed from the excerpts of the amazingly wrong-headed reviews. It's a gold mine of hilariously bad takes.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Although in retrospect, even as an adult the Rankin/Bass production did more justice and was much more true to the story than the big budget Hollywood epic rendition we eventually got.

And in 78 minutes versus nine hours and 18 minutes for the extended version of the Peter Jackson trilogy. And all Rankin-Bass really cut was Beorn.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's interesting that Queen is still basically "around", but it's been literally years since I heard a U2 song in anything or even on the radio. And they were just huge in the early-mid '90s.

I believe multiple members of U2 are now facing health issues.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I believe multiple members of U2 are now facing health issues.

I'm just not sure how that stacks up against the key member of Queen being dead for decades. I don't think that's why people still play Queen but not really U2. The sad thing is I don't even dislike early 90s and earlier U2, I actually kind of liked their deal, it just seems a bit passe.

I mean, not Simply Red levels of passe, to be fair. Until a garden party at a neighbours a few years back, I was wondering if I was the only person who remembered them (and hoping it was so because ugh!). Sadly though, this garden party I dunno how they managed this but they basically played the most awful MoR forgettable/forgotten junk from the very late 1970s through the mid-1990s. Not a single banger. Not a single genuinely good song - even when they were playing artists who have some good tunes, they seemed to be picking most astoundingly terrible stuff. It was incredible. If I hadn't met them and known them to be both humourless and in their 50s I'd have thought it was a put-on.

The Um, Actually game show on Dropout (and early seasons on YouTube) has a recurring feature of trying to guess what geek movie is being reviewed from the excerpts of the amazingly wrong-headed reviews. It's a gold mine of hilariously bad takes.

Oh my god I've watched a bit of Um, Actually (as you can imagine), but I haven't seen any of those yet, I'll have to keep a look out.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Empire Strikes Back:

"The more one sees the main characters, the less appealing they become. Luke Skywalker is a whiner, Han Solo a sarcastic clod, Princess Leia a nag, and C-3PO just a drone."

—People

 

[Cadence]

I'm just not sure how that stacks up against the key member of Queen being dead for decades. I don't think that's why people still play Queen but not really U2. The sad thing is I don't even dislike early 90s and earlier U2, I actually kind of liked their deal, it just seems a bit passe.

I mean, not Simply Red levels of passe, to be fair. Until a garden party at a neighbours a few years back, I was wondering if I was the only person who remembered them (and hoping it was so because ugh!). Sadly though, this garden party I dunno how they managed this but they basically played the most awful MoR forgettable/forgotten junk from the very late 1970s through the mid-1990s. Not a single banger. Not a single genuinely good song - even when they were playing artists who have some good tunes, they seemed to be picking most astoundingly terrible stuff. It was incredible. If I hadn't met them and known them to be both humourless and in their 50s I'd have thought it was a put-on.

Oh my god I've watched a bit of Um, Actually (as you can imagine), but I haven't seen any of those yet, I'll have to keep a look out.

Apparently if they had one of those polls about which country you should move to based on music...




... I get Angola (?).


See map of favorite group by country:

https://townsquare.media/site/366/files/2023/01/attachment-most_listened_rock_artists_world_map.jpg