Fanboys are out in force on Rotten Tomatoes. There are six bad reviews of The Dark Knight posted, and each one has hundreds of comments, mostly consisting of "**** YOU, YOU PRETENTIOUS DOUCHE! I HATE NEW YORKERS!" Four (or five—I'm too lazy to check) of the six reviews are from NY, you see. Here are the posted blurbs from reviews:

"The Dark Knight is noisy, jumbled, and sadistic." 194 comments

"This movie is too in love with itself to make you love it." 334 comments

"This movie is grim and jammed together. The narrative isn't shaped coherently to bring out contrasts and build toward a satisfying climax. The Dark Knight is constant climax; it's always in a frenzy, and it goes on forever." 535 comments WARNING: alleged spoilers in the review.

"Visually impressive, but any hack can do a halfway decent job with trailer-ready tangents. Not everyone can push the genre forward, and the fact that Nolan's padded popcorn flick isn't the streamlined masterpiece it could have been is a real buzzkill." 200 comments

"Plodding, puffed-up kitsch mistaking itself for profound psycho noir that the source material won't support." 122 comments WARNING: alleged spoilers in the review.

"The generation of consumers who swallow this pessimistic sentiment can’t see past the product to its debased morality. Instead, their excitement about The Dark Knight’s dread (that teenage thrall with subversion) inspires their fealty to product." 201 comments

Everyone's a jerk! Yay!

Dearest, beloved, Fandom Wank.

I know you were looking forward to great excitement today. Some of you said words to me that indicated you anticipated fiery 'judgement' upon those who remained fresh and dewey white, those you call n00bs.

Anyway, you got today instead.

Stop anticipating things, we'll just break your hearts.

Sincerely,

Sepia P. Magpie, Esq.



PS: Use this post to reflect on how you could be better people. Or just fuck around in the comments.

Kind of surprised that this hasn't yet been posted about here, as it's been a hot topic of discussion at several video game forums and blogs, not to mention a prime example of Gamer Drama. Anyway, before I start, a special thanks to the guys over at the Cheap Ass Gamer forums for several of these links.

There's a new game by Eidos out called Kane & Lynch: Dead Men, which was heavily advertised on the mega huge gaming site Gamespot (we're talking an ad campaign costing hundreds of thousands of dollars). A Gamespot editor named Jeff Gerstmann gives Kane & Lynch a 6.0, a considerably low score (here's the original review as well as a video version). A rumor reaches Kotaku that Gerstmann was fired over the review.

( Venture forth into the seedy underbelly of video game journalism (and hysteria) )

ETA - The plot thickens; it seems the official Kane & Lynch website hasn't exactly been honest with their review scores (thanks to miraba for the link).

ETA II - Gamespot speaks; Kotaku commenters call "bullshit" (thanks, j_crew_guy and mcity). And speaking of Kotaku, the Kane & Lynch website claims another victim (thanks, princessdot).

ETA III - Destructoid brings the snark.

ETA: Vice City - First the news: mass resignations at Gamespot on the way? If that's too teal deer for you, here's a brief summary of that post.

Also, The Escapist's Russ Pitts weighs in on the whole ugly situation (thanks ghostmaster); no Kane & Lynch review from Yahtzee yet, sadly. Newsweek's N'Gai Croal shares his two pennies as well.

ETA: San Andreas - Gerstmann speaks, plus analysis by Kotaku (thanks, iwanttobeasleep). I love this passage from the first link: Also, see that chart up there? That’s the estimated traffic performance of GameSpot over the most recent seven-day stretch that the figures are available. Remember, this story broke on Nov 29. That’s when people on the Internet started talking about blacking out the site.

Note the lack of a dip.

Go fanboys! Show that big bad Gamespot who's boss!

Meanwhile, Gamespot speaks some more.

This week, entertainment industry magazine Variety reviewed Super Mario Galaxy, probably this year's most highly anticipated Nintendo Wii game. The review contains statements that seem designed to stoke the fires of hardcore Ninty fanboys everywhere, such as: As good as the game is, though, it’s evidence of how bad the Wii is for third person action games, a problem first made clear in last year’s “Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess.” Holding the nunchuk, which moves Mario, and the Wii-mote, which makes him jump and spin, in separate hands, is an awkward arrangement.

Statements like these would invite vitriol on their own, but there was also a noticable "Sponsored by Sony" ad at the top of the page (note: it's not there any more). That and the review ending on the note that Mario's graphics are inferior to the latest Rachet and Clank game (a PS3 exclusive) smells more than a bit suspicious to many of the commenters:

( ZOMG CONSPIRACY! )

As an added bonus, the Kotaku and Joystiq threads about the review have some wank (and teal deer) as well, but the best bits seem to be in the Variety comments.

ETA - Somewhat related: Variety posts a news article about the upcoming Ghostbusters game. Included in this piece is the revelation that the Wii, DS, and PS2 versions will be more family oriented, while the PC, 360, and PS3 ones will be targeted towards hardcores. From the Go Nintendo thread's comments: I wouldn’t take anything read in Variety with any more value than what I read in supermarket tabloids.

And: Didn’t we learn not to trust Variety earlier today/yesterday when they reviewed Super Mario Galaxy? I would take this information with a grain of salt, just to be sure.

For anyone who doesn't already know, Yahtzee is a charming charismatic bastard who creates gaming reviews for the online magazine The Escapist using clip art, simple cartoons and by speaking really, really fast in a delicious English accent. This week he decided to tackle Halo3 in his typical Not Work Safe Style. Which is to say he utterly skewers it.

This does not go down well with some of the fanbois.

In the comment section, which is three times longer than his typical response, reviewers alternate between glowing praise and cries of "you just don't get it" in varying levels of butt hurt.

Also in this wank, we have a creepy reviewer wanting to take Yahtzee home to meet his mom, five dollar words helpfully defined for the stupid, and the banhammer coming down on someone dumb enough to say "I like wank".

( Some enjoyable quotes: )

Found this over at Smart Bitches Trashy Books and thought it was wanky enough to share. Over at Amazon.com, M.A. Bechaz reviews Evangelynn Stratton's novel Lady Blue. Her review is less than kind, and focuses mostly on the novel's historical inaccuracies.

( About as accurate as Hogan's Heroes... )

There is a lot of tl;dr wank on both sides, beginning when Anne Hope responds quite maturely with a review entitled M. A. Bechaz from Australia is a bitter hag.

( If you bitch about historical accuracy, you obviously don't have a life. )

Samantha also jumps in to defend the author:

( No one cares if Willow had a teapot! )

Lee C. is also quite valiant in her efforts:

( If you want historical accuracy, go read a textbook! )

The battle continues in the comments for both reviews, where M.A. Bechaz shows up to defend herself:

( Where do you find the time in your busy life to insult me? )


( Where did you go to school, anyway? )


( My reviews are more unbiased than yours. )


( Nothing says medieval times like a damsel in distress because she's lost her iPod... )

A minor wank, but one that made me lol nonetheless.

So anyway, Eragon that big bloated rip-off of SW and LotR and HP and Dragonheart that it is just got released at the movies, much to the rapture of thirteen year old boys across the English-speaking world.

Eric D Snider, internets comedian and film critic, reviews the erstwhile film:

I haven't read the book, but I know this about it: It was written by a home-schooled, fantasy-obsessed teenager named Christopher Paolini and published when he was 19. And yet somehow -- and this is stunning -- somehow the story turns out to be geeky, simple-minded and shamelessly derivative of "Lord of the Rings" and "Star Wars." Why, it's almost as if ... as if a home-schooled, fantasy-obsessed teenager wrote it!

In the reader's comments, some vent about their crappy teenage novels never getting published. Others take mild umbrage at his comments about home-schooled kids.

Others simply take potshots at the critic because ZOMG ERAGON ROX!!!

This proves that the writer of this review is a complete idiot (seriously). How can you psooibly judge his book off the movie makers mistakes?! In the book you will notice NO parallels from LOTR or SW. The story (in the book) is not geeky at all. And since when did not going to those Indoctrination camps (public schools) make you a target for insult.

All in all, I have never read a worse review, NEVER.

A book about dragons not being geeky? Whatevs. Mommy, on the other hand, decides to pull out the Cassandra Clare Defence-Card Deluxe on us:

I thought the book was good, considering it was written by a teenager. Now just the fact that you need to consider that tells you something. Still those who think they could write something that good, haven't written something that long. At least he had the brains to choose good sources to copy, and to pull together a cohesive story.

I think this post was just an excuse for me to say how much I hate Eragon and anything associated with it.

Yes, you read that correctly, but let me repeat it:

Happy Feet is an Evil Propaganda Movie

Well what if I were to tell you that the overall metaphor, that the overall themes of Happy Feet are that of A) there is nothing wrong with individuality, that society can actually benefit from it, B) the ecological devastation unknowingly caused by man on the environment and the need to stop it, C) the evils of keeping animals in captivity, D) it being okay to defy your elders for the sake of “the truth” and, oh yeah, E) The evils of religion. Wait, what? Back up a second. Did I read that right? The…evils…of religion?

As expected, not everyone agrees.

Over on LJ, oulangi's been posting her reviews on SS/HP stories.

Ptyx doesn't like it.

"Frankly? I wish I could prevent [info]oulangi from commenting my fics. Not because she's mocking some of the fics she reads (which is a behaviour I don't approve of), but because I wouldn't like people to read my stories through the filter of her reviews. She's intelligent and witty, but she's just a reader. She has her preferences. Your reaction to my story might be very different from hers, but if you start reading it after reading her comment, I'm afraid this will affect your experience. I can't prevent that, I know. But I don't like the whole idea." .

Or does she?

Personally I don't think it's refreshing, because I don't want to be spoiled or be influenced before reading a story. But I confess if she mocked one of those stories that everyone recced and that I hated, I would be very happy. But this is just my bad side, the side that I don't want to show to fandom, because that's not what I think fandom is about."

It's a little late for that, snickerdoodle. You just did.

People, of course, agree. There's even a pseudo-sly 'threat' from kaiz

By the same token, people who post public reviews of fic also have to be prepared for any response...

Heh. Inverydeed! ::veg::>


white_serpent, darkrose and kyuuketsurui give pointing out oulangi's doing this on her own LJ the old college try, to no avail.

ETA: There's responses!

( Cut because it's long, and I can't screencap in case of baleetion )

ETA 2: If someone would be kind enough to do screencapping, including these links, 'twould be greatly appreciated!

ETA 3: FILTEEREED! But she self-snitched a kinder, gentler tempter-tantrum. Thanks, ptyx!

Original post screencap. Small and hard to read, but there.

Kinda small and somewhat disjointed, but it's anime fans wanking again.

AnimeonDVD recently posted a review of the first volume of Koi Kaze, an anime that revolves around a brother and sister and their feelings for each other.

Over on the forum page, people are generally kind. A few people are creeped out by the subject matter, but most agree that Koi Kaze is a pretty good little show.

However, someone has to point out the obvious. This begins a few pages of (polite) debate over whether or not incest is genetic. Then indigo0086 feels the need to start something.

From that point on, the rest of the discussion turns into a half-successful debate and a string of supposed zingers/attempts at showing off.

Some highlights:

I AM NOT AN ANIMAL! I AM A HUMAN BEING!

I'll show you how liberal I can be!

"What's so wrong with incest?" Teiresias has an answer.

There are no words.

T.H.E.M. is an organization that does anime reviews, among other things such as Reduced Anime. Their reviews, etc. tend to take a humorous bent.

At some point in time, someone posted this review of The Dagger of Kamui. The author of the review didn't like it too much, and thought it was boring. The review contains the following lines:

Plus, it doesn't help that just before he gets attacked, we get treated to this annoying whottawhottawhottawhottawhottawhotta sound, along with that bizarre 70's disco soundtrack (he's just staying alive, I guess).

However, someone doesn't agree with the reviewer's assesment that the movie was boring and shows up in the forums. Arguing that, among other things, the whottawhottawhotta sound is symbolic of Buddhism. Or the Ainu. Or hell if I know.

( The original post )

You have to be a registered member to view the thread, so I'll provide you with some highlights:

( Ah ah ah ah stayin' alive, stayin' alive )

A little update to this cute little snippet from the ever-popular X fandom. You know, the one with the mysterious, anonymous reviewer?

Ohhhh! The mystery is *killing* meeeeh!

Well, apparently, it's killing ariseishuro, who would like all of the world to know that she knows *exactly* who the culprit reviewer is! But she has to ask permission before revealing their supah-sekrit identity... Oh, pooh. Her other all-wise friend says no, so no Masonic sekrits for teh plebes today. ;_;

But that won't let her be stopped from making vague and obsequeious innuendoes about who it is, oh no!

Anyone else smell the strong headwind of bullshit blowing over here, or is it just my imagination?

PS: Had to show off the new Chick icon. XD Isn't it great?

Brought to you from the fandom that takes it's canon as seriously as death.

Several months ago, in the X fandom, there came an upsurge of "anonymous fic review sites", in which members of the fandom- sometimes BNFs themselves- would assume a pseudonym and proceed to tear the hell out of someone else's fanfic. Some pretty darn snarky. Some were "dedicated to telling the truth about mainstream fanfic".

And then... there was Mary-Sue.

No, seriously, that's what she's calling herself. And she's already laid into a fanfic. Watch as I get wanky, someone else dares her to review one of their own fics, and the author of the reviewed fic finds out.

Small now, but knowing my fandom, it's going to explode, and soon!