Jump to content
We have a Patreon! Support this website and get exclusive content

ArrylT

Patron Supporter

  • Joined

  • Last visited

View Profile Find content

Posts posted by ArrylT

    8 hours ago, Skipp said:

     

    Of note RJ always took a moment to mention that the Whitecloaks took the time to make certain their uniforms were very clean.

     

    That was one of my favorite things I liked from the Ep2 scenes - the vast majority of their uniforms were clean but the bottoms were slightly muddy.   Plus it gave me a fond reminder of their interaction with Rand & Mat in Baerlon. ?

    7 hours ago, Terry05 said:

    7/10 as a failure? Don’t think so. 

    A+ 95 – 100% Outstanding
    A 90 – 94% Excellent
    Superior performance, showing comprehensive understanding of subject matter.
    A- 85 – 89% Approaching Excellent
    B+ 80 – 84% Exceeding Good
    B 75 – 79% Good
    Clearly above average performance with knowledge of subject matter generally complete.
    B- 70 – 74% Approaching Good
    C+ 67 – 69% Exceeding Satisfactory
    C 64 – 66% Satisfactory (minimal pass)
    Basic understanding of subject matter. Minimum required in all courses to meet certificate program requirements.
    C- 60 – 63% Approaching Satisfactory
    Receipt of a C- or less is not sufficient for certificate program requirements.
    D+ 55 – 59% Marginal Performance
    D 50 – 54% Minimal Performance
    F 0 – 49% Fail

    On 1/11/2022 at 12:14 AM, ArrylT said:

     

     

    Between WoTSpoilers (I just finished their indepth 2h breakdown of Episode 3), The Wheel Takes Pod and a few others - apart from being quite enjoyable and done by people who have Wheel of Time knowledge & passion - it definitely helps as a reminder the depth and volume of care the show is giving to adapting the books.   Obviously we all see things differently, but for me, it is not like they are just throwing a few crumbs - it is more like layer upon layer of Wheel of Time references are built into the show.  

     

     

     

    This one @Sir_Charrid

    4 hours ago, DojoToad said:

    So a show you couldn't stand watching past 3 episodes ends up with an 8 out of 10?  Doesn't say much for the 8.5 you gave to WoT. What does it take to get a 5 out of 10?

     

    I certainly would not have given S1 Game of Thrones an 8 on 10 back in 2011 when I first tried to watch it.  That grade is from 2020 when I did finally decide to give it a 2nd viewing.  

    45 minutes ago, fra85uk said:

     

    Wow. How much would you rate:

    a) The Sopranos.

    b) Breaking Bad.

    c) GoT season 1.

    Because i would not give 10 even to them, and they are like not even comparable to WoT-show.

     

    Depends on how you want to grade.   Season by season or show as a whole?

     

    I am already on record that it was tough for me to get into GOT, and the first time I only got 3 episodes in.   So S1 of Game of Thrones probably gets a 8.0 to 8.3 for me.   

     

    A few min later (after finding reviews)

     

    Going back to one place where Ive reviewed over 2000 items yes I gave it a 4/5.    Looks like I gave The Sopranos S1 an 4/5 as well (the site uses a grading system of 0/5 with half point increases) and Breaking Bad S1 a 4.5/5.    But those grades were given 5-7 years ago, and how I would feel about them now - like I said I'd have to go back and re-watch.

     

    The GOT show itself including every season and all the metrics I would use likely a 9.5.    I'd have liked to give it a 10 but the last 2 seasons had flaws (for me) that simply were not feasible to honestly do so. 

     

    Having not watched the Sopranos in over 5 years, or Breaking Bad in 2-3, I'd have to go back and re-watch to give them fair grades as a series as a whole series rather than a season by season review.

     

    *shrugs* simply my opnion.  I do my best to be as honestly critical when I can be but in the end it is simply my opinion.  I don't have a job as an entertainment critic (although I did write reviews for shows & movies for a University Newspaper for a year) so my reviews are simply more for myself.  What others think is immaterial since my goal is not to convince others - simply to share my thoughts.

    28 minutes ago, Raal Gurniss said:

    The shows quality really isn’t an 8.5 though is it? Be honest…Script isn’t that good, acting isn’t that good and special effects aren’t that good…

     

    Can you honestly see it winning awards in every category? It might win an award if there is a huge lack of opposition…But even the Witcher has it beat across the board as far as I can see.

     

    Honestly, after listening to a podcast that specifically discusses what is involved in making a tv series, and how it relates to the Wheel of Time, I would say I am more firmly comfortable with that grade than I was before.  I was probably more of a 8.25/8.3 rounding up but now I can definitely say it is an 8.5.   And as someone who is currently watching S1 of The Witcher, when I go into comparing it to The Wheel of Time, I find it is lacking.   On its own it is enjoyable - but when doing a compare & contrast, The Wheel of Time is winning.   Obviously for others it will be different.   

     

    You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but as long as you pretend your opinion is fact, it will be hard to have a further discussion.   Regardless there are plenty of people who like/love the show while noting it is not perfect.   Whether you agree with where we rate the show is immaterial to me.    

    ·

    Edited by ArrylT

    1 hour ago, Raal Gurniss said:

    Exactly! Passion and enjoyment for a show doesn’t need it to be perfect in every single way! I just wish that people could step back and tell the two apart.

     

    I've given season 1 a grade of 8.5/10 while giving the show itself a 10/10.   You'll find plenty of YT Content Creators who like or love the show but have given critical grades in the 7-8 range.  

    5 hours ago, notpropaganda73 said:

    The best thing for Sarah, and for the show, would be just to avoid social media altogether, sadly. 

     

    I don't really blame her for what she says in that video, when you are receiving private messages of that nature it is absolutely natural to zone in on those ones and tune out the rest. It's a common reaction to those things and when it gets as personal as I imagine it must have for Sarah, I think it's normal to react to that abuse as she has, rather than talk about any of the criticisms. Maybe she hasn't seen any of the well reasoned criticisms, if her inbox is flooded with abuse and she has avoided social media for the most part until now. 

     

    I understand being worried by her comments but at the same time I wouldn't read too much into this one video in terms of what we will see in S2. It's natural to be very proud of S1 when you are involved in it, making any television show is a huge feat and something as massive as WoT with all the challenges they faced, I would be proud too. So I'm not too het up by her video.

     

    As I said in my ep8 reaction post I will be much less forgiving of the show in S2 considering what we got in episode 8, but I am not going to get too het up or worried about the direction it is going in until we get some more solid info (interviews, trailers etc). 

     

     

     

    Absolutely - it is only human nature to focus on either the positive or the negative.   If you had someone knock on your door and say "I liked the show but", then the next person who knocked on the door said "The show sucks and it is all your fault you %$%" and then the last person said "I loved the show" (then multiply by 100),  it is highly doubtful you're going to focus on the average response - just the ones that were most positive & negative - that is simply how our brains are wired.   

     

    That does not mean constructive criticism is not useful or warranted to provide.  Rather timing is everything, and timing is not always something the person wanting to give criticism over has control over.  Or think of it this way - you're at a party, you see a friend and walk over to them and want to say "Hey I think you still owe me $ for the bet you lost" but before you get there they are in an argument that leaves them a little stressed.   Who is more likely to be appreciated & listened to.  You or another friend who walks up and says "Hey are you doing ok?  I've missed seeing you. "

     

    No doubt in my mind that, like most tv shows, it is probable that WOTTV will have people visiting these forums, and plenty of other places, to see what kind of response the show is getting.   So the criticism will be noticed by interns and so forth and passed forward at some point.   But expecting someone who may feel under attack (and we do not get to tell someone whether they can feel this way or not) to acknowledge & respond to constructive criticism after incidents in which they feel personally attacked is simply not the normal way people respond, imho.   

    Whether you like or dislike the show hopefully you'll find this thread helpful, at least if you have access to Twitter.  I think it directly speaks to a way that suggests you can dislike what the TV Show is while still respecting that the people involved with the show love Wheel of Time.  It is a 16 post thread fyi not just a 1 post (and I dont think I can post the entire thread).  

     

     

    6 minutes ago, Deviations said:

    It's funny how even though the stats indicate how heavily Rand is shown on the screen that it just doesn't feel that way?  I wonder if that is because of the way they've portrayed his character, they way they filmed his scenes, or maybe that I get disinterested in him when he's worried about Egwene?

     

    In the episode where he uses the power to explode out of the storeroom, I was focused on the bartender rather than him.....

     

    Right and that is the fun part about objective vs. subjective.   One of the people doing the screen time recording said

     

    "Time perception is a highly subjective experience. Emotions, among other things, play a role in how we feel the passing of seconds, minutes, and hours. We can lose track of time, or race against it. It drags when we are bored, or flies when we laugh.

    This subjectivity affects how we experience real events but also entertainment. Our favorite characters never get enough screen time, while the ones we barely tolerate always get too much. The credit rolls on a disappointingly slow episode, only to realize many found it too fast, or just as it should be."

     

    Objective is Rand has X amount of screen time

    Subjective is us choosing to feel more focused on other characters while that character is on the screen.

     

    I do think that the show, at least for me, sometimes does not make it very clear whose perspective we're supposed to be witnessing.   So I certainly would not disagree that for that scene, Dana was likely the intended focal character*.  Personally I was more focused on Rand, but that is because he is a favorite character of mine both book & show.    I usually find it is easier when reading to notice a POV change than when watching a movie or tv series, unless the scene itself changes.   

     

    * - evidence (for me) being that we did not see any weaves in Ep4 only when Rand flashed back in Ep7.  

    ·

    Edited by ArrylT

    On 12/12/2021 at 11:00 AM, ArrylT said:

    Just discovered another Breakdown video (and podcast) called WoTSpoilers.   About to check out Epi1 breakdown.   But apparently there is a a theory that in Ep3 (and this will be discussed in their Ep3 breakdown) the miners of Breens Spring are not mining ore, but AoL artifacts.

     

    And of course don't forget DragonMount has its own podcast that discusses each episode.   I think they can be accessed both on the site & on YT. 

     

     

    Between WoTSpoilers (I just finished their indepth 2h breakdown of Episode 3), The Wheel Takes Pod and a few others - apart from being quite enjoyable and done by people who have Wheel of Time knowledge & passion - it definitely helps as a reminder the depth and volume of care the show is giving to adapting the books.   Obviously we all see things differently, but for me, it is not like they are just throwing a few crumbs - it is more like layer upon layer of Wheel of Time references are built into the show.  

     

     

    3 hours ago, Spiritweaver1 said:

    Perhaps I may be indulged in taking this thread slightly off topic but I would be interested in peoples opinion about the TV show Elementary vs ACD's The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes.  I love mysteries almost as much as fantasy.  I loved The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes and so it was with considerable trepidation that my spouse and I dove into Elementary.  We gave it our customary three episode chance after missing a couple of the initial episodes.  For those who didn't see the show.  Sherlock Holmes is a British detective who is a drug addict.  He moves to New York where he gets a sober companion who is a woman ex doctor.  Anyway we decided it was excellent.  A few of the stories are clearly adaptations of an ACD story but most of it is made up present day stuff.    I classify it on a based on series although some are clearly adaptations.  In any event we watch it every few years if we can't find a good Detective story.  

     

    My point, for this forum, is if you have good acting and good stories and characters we care about an can relate to a lot of other weaknesses fall away.  Anybody else got any thoughts on this pairing/

     

    I have watched the first 5 seasons of Elementary, and the first 3 of Sherlock and have enjoyed them both.  

     

    I quite agree that good acting and good stories make for them being successful.   I do feel that some of the stories/episodes can be a little weak, but nothing that really detracts from my enjoyment - only more from a critical is this plausible standpoint.

     

     

    49 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

    I'm not a woke equal rights type, but even I know that someone using the word wahmen in their review is probably biased

     

    No argument there - not saying they are or are not - just that it was an interesting contrast.   Basically for however liberal or conservative we may be on a show, there is going to be someone further right or left on the scale.