|
Post by Whovitt on Jul 17, 2019 5:02:55 GMT
I'd like to prefix this post by saying that this is all just my opinion. Perhaps I just have higher standards that most people, but I do think I have a valid point to some degree.
This is something that's been on my mind for quite some time now. I regularly see the words "brilliant", "fantastic", or "excellent" thrown about when just about any new release comes out. If that's the case though, if the average Big Finish release falls into the brilliant/fantastic/excellent category, when something special - I mean really special - comes along, what's left to describe it? "It was absolutely mind-blowing"? I might just be me, but I feel like there should be another category between them.
Personally, the standard Big Finish release is "good". Not "great", not "amazing", just "good". Good isn't a bad thing, obviously, it just means it isn't as standout as some other releases are. There are, of course, some great releases (the recent Lucie Miller and War Master box sets come to mind), but I don't think they're as great as a lot of people seem to say they are. Again, it's all subjective, but neither set was "excellent"; both had stories that weren't quite as engaging as they could have been, for example. Maybe I'm just a little bit more critical (as in critique, not deliberately looking for problems) about things, but to see (practically) everything being praised as highly as they are simply doesn't make sense to me. If everything was *that good*, surely we'd become accustomed to it and things wouldn't seem as good as they once did because we're all desensitised to it?
I don't know, maybe I'm just overthinking things. I just wondering if there's anyone else that think there's a general overstating of the quality of Big Finish? Like I say, I don't think their output is bad by any means, it's just not all as 5/5 as a lot of people seem to imply it is.
|
|
|
Post by newt5996 on Jul 17, 2019 5:18:25 GMT
I’d argue for Big Finish’s general releases they often earn between 6-8/10 for your standard release with 9 and 10 being reserved for the real standouts. Compare that to the last few TV series averages:
Series 11: 5-6 Series 10: 5-7 Series 9: 4-6
Maybe we are a bit desensitized as big finish somehow manage to pull off content that is at least good (above a 5/10) 90% of the time if not more.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jul 17, 2019 6:36:38 GMT
Bearing in mind what Sturgeon's Law says, I do feel like Big Finish maintains a level of consistency that speaks well of them. Still the problem with consistently good generally means that the great things happen with less frequency. Part of the problem is that it is human nature to make a snap judgment on something and that usually skews things higher. Or also to skew things much lower depending on ones reaction. Oh that we lived in a world where we not so quick to pronounce something great/the best ever/fantastic or horrible/the worst ever/terrible. Anyway. Yeah. So. Oh and I am constantly bemused by review sites that seem to praise almost everything BF does and to shower upon them perfect rating scores. If everything is great, then nothing is.
|
|
|
Post by Whovitt on Jul 17, 2019 7:51:38 GMT
Bearing in mind what Sturgeon's Law says, I do feel like Big Finish maintains a level of consistency that speaks well of them. Still the problem with consistently good generally means that the great things happen with less frequency. Part of the problem is that it is human nature to make a snap judgment on something and that usually skews things higher. Or also to skew things much lower depending on ones reaction. Oh that we lived in a world where we not so quick to pronounce something great/the best ever/fantastic or horrible/the worst ever/terrible. Anyway. Yeah. So. Oh and I am constantly bemused by review sites that seem to praise almost everything BF does and to shower upon them perfect rating scores. If everything is great, then nothing is.That's kind of the crux of my point. BF always seems to be writing perfect material when, frankly, they're not. Nobody and nothing is consistently as good as they are made out to be. Their stuff is good (I don't want anyone to misunderstand me), and occasionally it's as good as the review sites say, but they don't produce 8-10/10 material at the rate that many review sites claim. All I really want to know is why?
|
|
|
Post by shallacatop on Jul 17, 2019 8:22:02 GMT
It's a very interesting question and some great (or is that fantastic? brilliant? excellent?) points raised. I am talking entirely about the Doctor Who output here.
Sometimes I feel that I am regularly going into threads and slating releases in comparison to the brief lines that many put saying a release is "excellent" or "amazing", or even looking at how the polls are skewed. In actual fact, I think I am less scathing of stories than what I come across, but sometimes I look like I'm ruining the party. The difference is I tend to elaborate on my thoughts and always mention something positive. It's very rare I actively dislike the story or the release, but I pay for the item, I devour it and then I like to really go through it all in my head before coming up with some final thoughts, of which I post here.
Their output, on the whole, is good. The quality of their output does differ between ranges, depending on which aspect of the show they're trying to mirror, I think. The main range is often very traditional, straightforward Doctor Who. Traditional isn't bad whatsoever, but can it consistently be brilliant? I'm not so sure. Having said that, I think opinions can often skew depending on who is involved. The recent Fifth Doctor, Adric, Nyssa & Tegan trilogies have, for me, been consistently good, but the novelty of having this TARDIS team back has made me rate it a little bit higher than if the same stories were with the Seventh Doctor & Ace. Similarly, Season 8 of the Fourth Doctor Adventures I perhaps rated a little bit higher because it was a breath of fresh air to have an original companion.
Big Finish are also very nostalgic with a lot of their output. I think that's naturally going to rate higher with a lot of fans. Whether that's TARDIS teams you grew up with, returning elements such as companions and monsters, or even sequels to stories. The thing that instantly springs to mind is the Dalek story in Third Doctor Adventures Volume 3, which was highly praised here, yet I thought it was dire.
I would say I do rate Big Finish a little lower than I would the TV series. That's not a slight on BF, but I think there's more to "cling on" to with a visual story on telly that might make me be a touch generous with my score than I would if the equivalent was on audio.
Interesting stuff, as I say. I feel I have more to say but my mind has gone blank!
|
|
|
Post by pawntake on Jul 17, 2019 10:19:30 GMT
Full marks Whovitt!! A very interesting and frank discussion. BF of course are second to none,when it comes to assembling casts,producing scripts,and recording the stories(like a well oiled machine) so in effect they are an audio-story production line.So not every audio will be a blockbusting epic!! "Along with the sunshine there's gonna be a little rain sometime" The general standard is good,and when a story is above average,it will always be well acclaimed. Occaisonally i sometimes get the impression that certain stories come-over as being rushed,its a feeling of "Lets get it in the can and move on"But of course i could be completely wrong and doing BF a big disservice.Not every audio will "knock my socks-off" in the main for me the standard is good!!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2019 11:43:15 GMT
Bearing in mind what Sturgeon's Law says, I do feel like Big Finish maintains a level of consistency that speaks well of them. Still the problem with consistently good generally means that the great things happen with less frequency. Part of the problem is that it is human nature to make a snap judgment on something and that usually skews things higher. Or also to skew things much lower depending on ones reaction. Oh that we lived in a world where we not so quick to pronounce something great/the best ever/fantastic or horrible/the worst ever/terrible. Anyway. Yeah. So. Oh and I am constantly bemused by review sites that seem to praise almost everything BF does and to shower upon them perfect rating scores. If everything is great, then nothing is.That's kind of the crux of my point. BF always seems to be writing perfect material when, frankly, they're not. Nobody and nothing is consistently as good as they are made out to be. Their stuff is good (I don't want anyone to misunderstand me), and occasionally it's as good as the review sites say, but they don't produce 8-10/10 material at the rate that many review sites claim. All I really want to know is why? Well, I wonder how long they'd get their pre-release freebie downloads if they were giving them 3 or 4/10 each time? That's a lot of money saved each month on BF if you get them all gratis! No, I kid, I don't think any of the reviewers who regularly post can be called out for that - indeed IndieMacUser, I think, was the one who got the infamous "crappy review" comment from Nick for daring to suggest Charlotte Pollard 2 wasn't any great shakes. Frankly I thought the review was kinder than most fans were on it! I've seen all the reviewers and bloggers who post here take issue with at least some of the BF output so I don't think I'd cite that as an issue for anyone here but I'm sure we've all seen the places who do give seemingly every BF release a totally glowing report. I think we've done this discussion before and I made the one Harold made above - if you praise everything to the hilt, then you're not going to be listened to when you really do love something and want to make people aware of it. If Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel gave every movie two thumbs up...they'd never be remembered. You say you love everything, all you're doing is making everything average again. I stopped caring about the BF reviews in DWM magazine a few years ago for that reason - I think 3 months in a row there was "one of the best things Big Finish have ever done" and it was just a run of the mill MR or CC story. Now - hey - maybe the reviewer (Michael something) felt that but with a long enough test sample of issues I could see...he loved (or said he loved) almost everything. Even stories that he didn't deem masterpieces...there would still be one element plucked for enormous praise ("One of Colin's greatest performances..." etc) . Again, maybe he did love all those, thought they were genius works and listens to them to this day but I don't want cheerleading PR masquerading as critique (and BF DO advertise in DWM so is PR that far off track?) A lot of the reviewers of BF that do seem to think everything is great reminds me of those Youtubers who get free Marvel or Star Wars merch so they can do "exclusive unboxings" - they're not really being asked for their opinion on whatever the product is, but for their time in doing free advertising and PR. I see Mark posting when the review snippets get added to releases and sometimes they're so impossibly far away from my thoughts I can't even recognise them. When the most generic, bland paint by numbers story gets an "Instant classic, if you only hear one thing this month...." quote, I am reminded of Paul Ross who was accused of giving bad films better reviews to get his name on film posters. It's sad a lot of online criticism has come to that to. It's not a BF or DW issue either, it's really any form of criticism. The internet opened things up, so you didn't have to go to film school or study language to write about film, for example. That's great in that there's not an elite getting to dictate consensus but at the same time it means any Tom, Dick or Harriett can use social media to promote anything regardless of their knowledge, context, motivations or talents. A reviewer I trust is not just someone who can tell me if something is good or bad, but why. Give me insights into something I'd misjudged or not seen, a new perspective. Some of my favourite music writing, by Lester Bangs or Greil Marcus, I completely disagree with what they think of the music sometimes but the passions, the knowledge, the originality of the way the writing is presented made them essential reading. I think that's a bit lofty for reviewing BF but the idea is the same. A truly great review, like I saw Mark Kermode do live once on The Ninth Configuration, is something I remember as long as the thing it's reviewing. Again...asking a bit much here, yeah, but thats kinda how I see reviewing - a lot of the critics online do 90% synopsis, 10% review. They may as well just tweet their marks out of ten for all you actually get out of it. Which is absolutely fine - it's a fast paced world now and people want things in an instant. They don't always want an essay when a "not bad" will do. Horses for courses. I'd imagine it affects people who only buy select BF a lot more. Those of us who either buy it all, or have enough of a knowledge of the writers, talents and formats to know what doesn't interest us, would be less affected. Someone trying to get into BF looking for a more critical, discerning eye...I don't envy them.
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jul 17, 2019 16:12:19 GMT
Speaking as someone who reviews for Big Finish, is like to throw my proverbial hat into the discussion. First, in my experience, Big Finish is super cool about negative reviews. All they ask is to be sent them privately and not tagged on them in social media. However, many reviewers are also trying to get reviews out within a day or two of release, making snap judgements to meet this deadline. And finally, different people interpret a 8/10 etc. differently. Some see it as excellent and some see that as the threshold of good. Just food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jul 17, 2019 16:14:33 GMT
And as an aside, I think Shallactop is one of the best at "reviewing" stories here. As you mentioned, always finding a positive on a "bad" release or a negative on a "good" release.
|
|
ljwilson
Chancellery Guard
It's tangerine....not orange
Likes: 5,062
|
Post by ljwilson on Jul 17, 2019 16:26:21 GMT
A good debate. I always rate out of 10, where 5 is average (because it is in the middle), 6 is good, 7 very good, etc. 10 is flawless, because you can't go above 10.
I don't think I have ever given a 10, but a few 9's definitely because the stories were so good they were brilliant.
What does my head in, is the awarding of 10 out of 10 for any old story (which a few do on the **********.com, which must do imperialheathen's head in, not to mention the 1's).
Or, someone will score a story a 7, and then moan now bad it is. A 7? That's only 3 away from being perfect and a distant 7 away from being the worst story ever!?
Surely a 7 is a very good, but with niggles and other bits etc that hold it back from being excellent (at 8 in case you are wondering).
If everyone used ljwilson's amazingly logical scoring system the world would be much simpler, and I would rule!
I'll get mi coat..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2019 16:37:26 GMT
A good debate. I always rate out of 10, where 5 is average (because it is in the middle), 6 is good, 7 very good, etc. 10 is flawless, because you can't go above 10. I don't think I have ever given a 10, but a few 9's definitely because the stories were so good they were brilliant. What does my head in, is the awarding of 10 out of 10 for any old story (which a few do on the **********.com, which must do imperialheathen's head in, not to mention the 1's). Or, someone will score a story a 7, and then moan now bad it is. A 7? That's only 3 away from being perfect and a distant 7 away from being the worst story ever!? Surely a 7 is a very good, but with niggles and other bits etc that hold it back from being excellent (at 8 in case you are wondering). If everyone used ljwilson's amazingly logical scoring system the world would be much simpler, and I would rule! I'll get mi coat.. I did take Whovitts OP and subsequent post to be more about online reviewers rather than fan-voting but while we're on it, I think I'm pretty much on board with you on the 1-10 ratings and how you score them. I do have plenty of things I give a 10 though, subjectively, because even if I don't think they're perfect they're exactly what I want from them and exactly what they're trying to be at the same time - Holy Terror or And The Pirates being my go-to examples of this at BF.
|
|
ljwilson
Chancellery Guard
It's tangerine....not orange
Likes: 5,062
|
Post by ljwilson on Jul 17, 2019 16:41:30 GMT
A good debate. I always rate out of 10, where 5 is average (because it is in the middle), 6 is good, 7 very good, etc. 10 is flawless, because you can't go above 10. I don't think I have ever given a 10, but a few 9's definitely because the stories were so good they were brilliant. What does my head in, is the awarding of 10 out of 10 for any old story (which a few do on the **********.com, which must do imperialheathen's head in, not to mention the 1's). Or, someone will score a story a 7, and then moan now bad it is. A 7? That's only 3 away from being perfect and a distant 7 away from being the worst story ever!? Surely a 7 is a very good, but with niggles and other bits etc that hold it back from being excellent (at 8 in case you are wondering). If everyone used ljwilson's amazingly logical scoring system the world would be much simpler, and I would rule! I'll get mi coat.. I did take Whovitts OP and subsequent post to be more about online reviewers rather than fan-voting but while we're on it, I think I'm pretty much on board with you on the 1-10 ratings and how you score them. I do have plenty of things I give a 10 though, subjectively, because even if I don't think they're perfect they're exactly what I want from them and exactly what they're trying to be at the same time - Holy Terror or And The Pirates being my go-to examples of this at BF. You are right davy, that was the point of the o/p, but sometimes you just have to get these things off your chest and people's scoring drives me nuts at times.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2019 16:52:22 GMT
I did take Whovitts OP and subsequent post to be more about online reviewers rather than fan-voting but while we're on it, I think I'm pretty much on board with you on the 1-10 ratings and how you score them. I do have plenty of things I give a 10 though, subjectively, because even if I don't think they're perfect they're exactly what I want from them and exactly what they're trying to be at the same time - Holy Terror or And The Pirates being my go-to examples of this at BF. You are right davy, that was the point of the o/p, but sometimes you just have to get these things off your chest and people's scoring drives me nuts at times. Absolutely. Related to a pet peeve of mine, I don't know if you're aware of the farce that is the Net Promoter Score, but it's the most common way of interpreting the surveys you sometimes get when you speak to a call centre and they text or call you back for feedback. I had to deal with them for years first as an advisor then as a manager. The first question is "Based on your experience today how likely are you to recommend us" or "Based on the person you spoke to how likely?" - anything below a 9/10 is bad. 0-6 are "detractors" and 7-8 are "passives" - only a 9 or 10 is a "promoter". Now if I tell someone a restaurant is a 8/10...I think it's good verging on really very good. I think generally that'd be a safe bet for people hearing 8/10, but in customer service a 8/10 is bad. No matter what questions you get asked afterwards, it's that one question that the call is scored on and the advisor gets marked on. So, basically - anyone reading this who ever answers those surveys, give the person a 9 or 10 next time if they've done well. You might think an 8 reflects well on them - who wouldn't - but it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Jul 17, 2019 16:53:43 GMT
Hmm... of course we all have different tastes. The world would be pretty boring otherwise. With myself, I have noticed that sometimes I am a bit off concerning the average ratings of some stories- some stories with bad reviews, I actually quite enjoy and vice versa (there have been stories with raving reviews which I could not get into or which did not click with me or I just plainly did not enjoy at all, for various reasons- Jubilee and the first War Master series come to mind). In some cases, how I rate a story also depends on my mood. Sometimes, you are just in a mood where something funny won't cut it. Or dark story elements are just too much. Or it is one of these days when Dalek voices just grind on your nerves. I can only assume that it is the same for other people reviewing things. It might also come down to personal preferences- some people are insanely happy with this month's Lucie Miller release, while I myself, as not the biggest Lucie fan, would only range it between "average to slightly better than good". I admit that the release I enjoyed most this month (so far, yet to listen to Legacy) was Colin Baker's Main Range release. But even that one was not "amazing", just VERY good. And the writing of the latest War Master set was by far not as good as for the first one (however, I enjoyed this one more...). However, I totally agree with the overblown positive reviews on "official" and semi-"official" sites. I actually have started to ignore those and prefer looking on here or the ********** or goodreads or similar and see what Tom, Dick and Mary think. I agree that it could hurt more than help if this trend of "most amazing EVAA!" continues- it basically becomes what we call "Selbstbeweihräucherung" in German (blessing themselves with incense). And it might hurt the company as well as the review sites! Overall... recently, I became more and more aware that I needed to have a look at things myself, because I had kept away from many things just because the reviews were bad or average (and then I realized I did enjoy them quite a bit!). I find it gets harder and harder to tell if I might like something by just looking at the reviews and not trying it myself. But maybe that is just me going through phases?
|
|
|
Post by shallacatop on Jul 17, 2019 17:26:20 GMT
And as an aside, I think Shallactop is one of the best at "reviewing" stories here. As you mentioned, always finding a positive on a "bad" release or a negative on a "good" release. Thank you, that’s very kind. I think balance is always a good thing. Sometimes there’s a release I think is so great that I might not have a negative, but there’s always a positive to a release I wasn’t so keen on. My initial post wasn’t a slight on those who do rate highly or only post brief comments. I was merely comparing myself and my own thoughts to those.
|
|
|
Post by shallacatop on Jul 17, 2019 17:31:14 GMT
The reviews on other sites and for publications that some of you are mentioning is an interesting one. I don’t tend to read them, apart from the occasional one in DWM, but I do often see them on the Big Finish site. I have found that it relates to the fan pleasing point I mentioned in my initial post.
For example, a War Doctor release or a Tenth Doctor and Donna story. River Song encountering a past Doctor. A meetup of UNIT new and old. All these fan pleasing elements - I suppose novelties is a good term - where the mere concept of them have excitement run high, without listening to the actual release. Just the realisation of these concepts will naturally cause fans to be more positive. That’s not to say they’re false in their views, after all they’re all subjective opinions, but I think they have a valid influence. I’ve admitted as much myself.
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Jul 17, 2019 18:51:14 GMT
I'm probably quite guilty of overusing glowing adjectives (I can probably tell just by how much I wish for some new glowing adjectives) and not explaining why, but one reason I don't like to do much explaining is spoilers and struggling with the spoiler tags, and another is that I don't like to dwell that much on the negative. I'd rather not have to come up with criticisms just to prove that I'm capable of it, or to prove that I don't think Big Finish can do no wrong. I'm happy enough to see the reviewers often give high marks it if means they saw the good points to a release and enjoyed it accordingly. I'm very pleased that when I read a review (which isn't often enough), I often do have a similar perspective as to the high points. I think Doctor Squee usually has some good reasons for squeeing.
I also kind of don't like to pick out specific story points because I feel like maybe sometimes people put too much emphasis on that and if they can find things wrong with a release, perhaps feel like they didn't enjoy it as much as they might have. There's still a difference between the sense of quality and the sense of enjoyment. I can find 10 things objectionable about a release but still enjoy it greatly, it all depends. (I adore the Scorchies stories, for example, in spite of finding the whole idea to be painfully ludicrous).
It's often the overall story and the flow of it and my enjoyment level rather than specific points that matters more to me, I think. It's very important to me that stories and box sets should seem like they're building up rather than sagging in the middle or at the end (this means you, Time War 2), and I do speak up when that's my experience . Sometimes I don't know what a story could have done better, I just know that it felt like there was clearly room for improvement.
Likewise with ratings, not everything there may be as it appears. I give almost everything a 4 or a 5 and reserve 3 for things like The Boy That Time Forgot. I just don't happen to think there's very much Big Finish output that's really bad, so there's nothing for me to award a rating of 1 or 2. There's quite a spectrum between 4 and 5, and a lot of things get rounded up, I suppose as if I were saying I thought they were perfect when I may have a number of criticisms. I think they are very few things I would actually give a genuine full 5 to, but there are a lot of things I'd give a 4.6 to and more than a few I'd give 4.8 to the way I rate things. 75% of Big Finish's output probably gets a 4 out of me for coming in between 3.75 and 4.5.
I think it's all very individual, though, and even subject to mood sometimes. I'd take points off for something being so morbid or tragic that it makes my mood worse, whereas it sounds like that's the grit and realism that others often look for. (I'd happily see the finality of the events of Earthshock or Blake's 7 reversed just for the sake of stories, which probably isn't a very popular opinion). I try to wait until I'm in good mood to rate something or comment on it, just so I'm not overly harsh just because I wasn't in a good mood.
I'm happy enough to try to keep in mind that not everyone rates things the same way, and not everyone likes everything that much, and they're entitled to and it doesn't mean they're attacking something or being unfair. Others may like things more with repeated listens, just as I often do. I hope everyone will continue to feel free to say what they honestly think about releases and not worry about how it might be interpreted.
|
|
|
Post by theotherjosh on Jul 17, 2019 19:59:13 GMT
I think there are a couple factors in play.
With a very few exceptions, Big Finish stories are almost never “bad”. Meaning, they successfully tell the stories they want to tell. There are individual stories or even entire ranges that are not to my taste, but I recognize that those stories meet a standard of technical merit. I might not personally enjoy them, but that’s not the fault of the stories. That's on me. Vienna (for example) is certainly not bad simply because I don't enjoy listening to that kind of story.
As other people have noted in the thread, we each apply our own standards. A five out of time might be de rigueur for any story a particular individual enjoyed, whereas that score might be effectively unattainable for another person. My five is not your five. My five is not even my own five from a few years ago.
I wouldn’t say that I self-censor, but the way I see this forum is that it’s a way to celebrate Big Finish. We’re all dedicated fans, and if a particular story was not to my liking, I generally don’t say anything at all about it. I don’t think that my opinion is so valuable that the world needs to hear it. I don’t want to diminish someone’s appreciation of something they enjoy. Consequently, when I do comment in a thread, it’s generally to express appreciation for a story, and that skews the sample.
|
|
|
Post by project37 on Jul 18, 2019 1:30:54 GMT
I actually left another forum and came here because it seemed very difficult to express any sort of criticism without being dismissed as being negative for the sake of it. I'm of the mindset that not everything can be 10/10 best thing ever. It's okay if something is "just" good - it doesn't make it a failure. Some stories are just going to resonate with me more than others (and my 10/10 "all-time classic" could very well be your 0/10 "how on earth was this allowed to be made" ). A reviewer I trust is not just someone who can tell me if something is good or bad, but why. Give me insights into something I'd misjudged or not seen, a new perspective. Yes, absolutely! I used to write reviews and host a podcast about specific Spider-Man comic book titles. I couldn't stand reading reviews that began and ended with "this sucked"/"this was awesome". I cared about the material, so I made the effort to dive in and explain why I liked something or didn't like something. I tried very hard not to present my opinions as fact, but try to offer something a little different - e.g., this part of my life experience shaped my perspective which is why this scene or character was inspiring. Or, the story let me down because I felt that plot point X could have been developed a bit more. Someone trying to get into BF looking for a more critical, discerning eye...I don't envy them. I don't know him at all, but I *highly* recommend the BF reviews by Styre. Thoughtful, well-written, and above all, insightful and fair. I've been reading and enjoying them for years and even though I don't always agree, I'm glad that he's still doing them. Any time there's a sale, I rush to the website to check his scores and reviews. Check them out here: audioreviews.org.uk/I wouldn’t say that I self-censor, but the way I see this forum is that it’s a way to celebrate Big Finish. We’re all dedicated fans, and if a particular story was not to my liking, I generally don’t say anything at all about it. I don’t think that my opinion is so valuable that the world needs to hear it. I don’t want to diminish someone’s appreciation of something they enjoy. One of the things that I'd learned to appreciate while doing my podcast (and I didn't get it right away) was that regardless of my reaction to the comic book, a number of people worked very hard to make the product happen. I never made it personal about the creators, but still had to work to be balanced and thoughtful in commenting on I'd connected (or didn't) with someone else's artistic effort. I wasn't always so mindful when posting comments about BF audios over the years and looking back, I can see how it might have been received far more harshly than I'd ever intended. Not just by the creators, but also my fellow fans. That said, I still think we can and should be critical if we want to have conversations; I've learned to be much better about my tone and not inadvertently take away from someone else's enjoyment. It's not all perfect, but we're all here because we still love and appreciate what they do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2019 6:27:45 GMT
There are some really interesting points here. As to the why of it... Clout, clout, clout. A reputation for excellence goes a long way. I'm reminded of the discussion on The Sirens of Time thread about the differences between then and now. Nostalgia's a strong factor in how we approach these releases. We want to relive a bygone moment at Saturday teatime with friends and heroes from childhood. That would hold us, but I don't think that would keep us. Stories change to meet the zeitgeist and Big Finish have developed their own distinctive voice outside of those rose-tinted lenses. The difference between Sirens and more recent releases. I see a lot of the reviews as a way for people to gush about this feeling because it's such a rarity to recapture. Something to share and connect with others who feel the same. We tend to hold them to a fairly high standard, so what would be considered a strong release from others is just fair or good from them. When they miss the mark, when they fail, it's a big deal as its so fundamentally out-of-character for their output. Thus, we tend to forgive when we feel they've slipped up. It's that goodwill again and it's quite powerful. Even more so, as Davy points out, now in the age of the internet where a voice is given to both professional reviewer and amateur listener alike. Populism and commonality wins out over the restrictions of elitism purely as it's about what people like rather than what they're allowed to like. I'm a big fan of both genre-breaking stories like Creatures of Beauty and meat-and-potatoes traditional stories like The Kiss of Death. I get enjoyment from both, but what makes them good varies widely on an emotional, intellectual and technical standpoint. As I think I've said somewhere else before "It sucks," means nothing. It's relative, it's subjective and it doesn't say anything about the work beyond an opinion. There's no demonstration of understanding. No explanation for this view. If the review instead looks into the mechanics of the story, the craft, then it does what all critical writing should do -- build. The postmortem on fanedited stories I posted here was the end result of having learnt something from digging down into stories with more... controversial reputations. We understand why things work or don't work in order to make better stories and I think the reviews that stick with us -- good or ill -- tap into that quite strongly.
|
|