Few things irritate me more than reviewers/critics who think their opinions surpass those of every other living human being. Be it novels, books in general, politics, religion, etc., it irks me when people don’t “review” something but insist it’s the worst possible thing, most boring thing of all time, can’t possibly be worth investigating, and “you’re just plain stupid” if you think it, watch it, or consider it worthy of your time. Now, granted, it could be said that the same irritation can exist for the opposite stance such as it’s the best possible thing, most entertaining thing of all time, is definitely worth every minute of your investigation, and/or “you’re just plain stupid” if you don’t think it, watch it, or consider it worthy of your time.
Reviewing means giving your opinion based on what you see, hear, watch, and investigate. Only those who vomit out their sarcastic critiques to show off how “educated” they are in their abilities to rate and observe things that probably no one else has the ability to do which is why their review is so important and legitimate, think everyone will believe, follow, and appreciate their elitist conclusions.
You might wonder what prompted this “review” of reviewers/critics. I just read some reviews of the Season 1 of “Marshals” and a couple from Season 2. Suffice it to say they were negative and leaned toward the description of reviewers/critics in the previous two paragraphs. So. Tell me this: if this series is so drastically unwatchable, cliché, blah, blah, blah, why did so many people enjoy it and cause it to be renewed for a second season in record time?
Reviewers/Critics, try this: Give your opinion (because that’s all it is) respectfully with YOUR reasons for disliking the show, book, etc., and then admit it’s simply not for you and that’s why you don’t/can’t recommend it. That’s the grown-up thing to do.
Geez.
Leave a Reply