Spoilers Rings of Power is back!

[TheSword]

I thought we talked about how hyperbole wasn't helpful? "Rend their garments"? Also a little schadenfreude there, with your talk about enjoying other people's consternation about issues that clearly don't matter to you. I'm not seeing any high ground on your side of this.

I’m not talking about a person’s creative work, requiring many years of effort and skill. But rather the collective apoplexy of a group of people who have said some fairly unkind things and yuk’d on a lot of peoples yum IMHO. A self immolation if you like considering that it seems to be entirely self inflicted and highly likely to do little but make further cool fantasy stuff likely.

That’s said a new episode is out! Can’t wait to watch it tonight.

 

[Eric V]

Like I said, you're welcome to not care, but I would still ask for respect for those who do.

Wait, are you saying the author of the article did NOT do this:

He states that the old man turning the key couldn’t have produced enough torc to shift the stonework and because he didn’t see the mechanics behind that he won’t consider it wow.

He states that while steam based explosion can trigger volcanic eruptions this one wouldn’t have in his opinion even though it’s fictional representation of a volcanic explosion not a scientific one and he admits he’s not an expert

 

[Micah Sweet]

Wait, are you saying the author of the article did NOT do this:

He states that the old man turning the key couldn’t have produced enough torc to shift the stonework and because he didn’t see the mechanics behind that he won’t consider it wow.

He states that while steam based explosion can trigger volcanic eruptions this one wouldn’t have in his opinion even though it’s fictional representation of a volcanic explosion not a scientific one and he admits he’s not an expert

I mentioned the specific points I had an issue with.

 

[Eric V]

I mentioned the specific points I had an issue with.

Well look, if the author of the article did indeed do what TheSword points out here, it's the very definition of nitpicky.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well look, if the author of the article did indeed do what TheSword points out here, it's the very definition of nitpicky.

That doesn't excuse the hyperbole or schadenfreude.

 

[Eric V]

That doesn't excuse the hyperbole or schadenfreude.

Fine. As someone else who read the articles, without any hyperbole, they are an excellent example of being nitpicky, and therefore shouldn't be taken too seriously as a source of valid criticism.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Fine. As someone else who read the articles, without any hyperbole, they are an excellent example of being nitpicky, and therefore shouldn't be taken too seriously as a source of valid criticism.

In your subjective opinion. Fine.

 

[ART!]

Would detailed criticism of the articles be seen by those who like the articles as just as nitpicky as those who say the articles are nitpicky? Would we then enter a recursive nitpicking loop? Would this be unusual?

 

[John R Davis]

Good grief

Please start your own Whinge of Power thread
Ta

 

[ART!]

What a perfectly fair and not at all insulting view of someone else's opinions and research!

So...to be fair and not insulting I should read everyone's opinions and research? Not really following you here.

I'll agree that the show has problems, and there have been a lot of little things that have been headscratchers, but not enough to ruin anything for me - or drive me to spend my time laying into the mistakes,"weaknesses", "errors" etc...

I mean, if people get something out of spending their time that way, cool for them I guess.

Having gone to school for fine art, I got art criticism training, and the way most stuff online goes about "critiquing" media is...not art criticism. It's mostly opinion wankery. So, I avoid most of it, because 9 times out of 10 it's mostly nonsense, or long-winded pedantery, or worse.

I have the links to the articles, so maybe if I'm laid up for a day I'll read them? I have ADHD, so probably not.