By contrast to Sharky, I hesitate to weigh in because I *was* involved with this issue, but I have been following these reviews for a while now, and so I'll try to make my thoughts more general.
What has always annoyed me most about his reviews is that he seems to believe his opinions are facts. He doesn't like certain strips, therefore apparently the comic is only half good.
But those other strips may well appeal to people who don't like the ones that he does. I don't know if it's just because 2000ad is the only comic I read, but for me, only thinking some of the strips are good and thinking the others are a bit meh, is par for the course for *professional* comics, let alone small press comics.
I understand his problems with reprint. I personally haven't bought the collections, so I enjoy reading those strips in Paragon. If I had already read them, Paragon probably would feel slightly less value for money.
I also understand (though do not share) his frustration over the time between issues. I don't know if timings could be reorganised such that there are bigger chunks of fewer stories in each Paragon. Would that help even if it was possible? If he didn't like the particular stories showcased in such an issue, probably not.
I also greatly appreciate any crit given to a piece of work, so long as it is well written and thoughtfully constructed. Too Busy Thinking About Comics is an exemplary example of what I mean by this, I would dread having my work torn apart by that guy, but would probably agree with everything he says. The guy who writes these FP reviews simply doesn't seem to have anything else to say other than I liked it, therefore it is good, or I didn't like it therefore it is shit.
I don't want this to sound like sour grapes for a bad review, indeed this review for me is better than I thought it would be; I can live with a 'meh' far more than I could if he got his claws out all over google. As I say, I'm basing this on his earlier reviews more than this one.
One review that sticks in my mind is the one for the first part of Rise of the Mekkosapiens. He said it reminded him of the Matrix. Really? Was that the best he could think of? There are robots and they have enslaved humanity, but apart from this widely used concept, the stories are entirely different, and the comment smacked of lazy writing. Rise of the Mekkosapiens is closer to Sonic the Hedgehog than the Matrix (I mean that in a good way Matt!)
In summary, there are problems intrinsic to the format which you either settle with and continue with, knowing that you can't please everyone, or you experiment until you find something that works better. But these past 3 issues have been slightly different to those before, so you are obviously open to change and improvement, and that is all good and we'll see where it goes from here.
But when it comes to reviewing the story content rather than the way it is packaged, this guy has very little to say and says it with crude inelegance and complete disrespect for the idea that he could actually be using his writing to help make the world a better place by being at all insightful or constructive.
What has always annoyed me most about his reviews is that he seems to believe his opinions are facts. He doesn't like certain strips, therefore apparently the comic is only half good.
But those other strips may well appeal to people who don't like the ones that he does. I don't know if it's just because 2000ad is the only comic I read, but for me, only thinking some of the strips are good and thinking the others are a bit meh, is par for the course for *professional* comics, let alone small press comics.
I understand his problems with reprint. I personally haven't bought the collections, so I enjoy reading those strips in Paragon. If I had already read them, Paragon probably would feel slightly less value for money.
I also understand (though do not share) his frustration over the time between issues. I don't know if timings could be reorganised such that there are bigger chunks of fewer stories in each Paragon. Would that help even if it was possible? If he didn't like the particular stories showcased in such an issue, probably not.
I also greatly appreciate any crit given to a piece of work, so long as it is well written and thoughtfully constructed. Too Busy Thinking About Comics is an exemplary example of what I mean by this, I would dread having my work torn apart by that guy, but would probably agree with everything he says. The guy who writes these FP reviews simply doesn't seem to have anything else to say other than I liked it, therefore it is good, or I didn't like it therefore it is shit.
I don't want this to sound like sour grapes for a bad review, indeed this review for me is better than I thought it would be; I can live with a 'meh' far more than I could if he got his claws out all over google. As I say, I'm basing this on his earlier reviews more than this one.
One review that sticks in my mind is the one for the first part of Rise of the Mekkosapiens. He said it reminded him of the Matrix. Really? Was that the best he could think of? There are robots and they have enslaved humanity, but apart from this widely used concept, the stories are entirely different, and the comment smacked of lazy writing. Rise of the Mekkosapiens is closer to Sonic the Hedgehog than the Matrix (I mean that in a good way Matt!)
In summary, there are problems intrinsic to the format which you either settle with and continue with, knowing that you can't please everyone, or you experiment until you find something that works better. But these past 3 issues have been slightly different to those before, so you are obviously open to change and improvement, and that is all good and we'll see where it goes from here.
But when it comes to reviewing the story content rather than the way it is packaged, this guy has very little to say and says it with crude inelegance and complete disrespect for the idea that he could actually be using his writing to help make the world a better place by being at all insightful or constructive.
