Regarding Who reviews...

[calapine]

If you read my Who episode reviews, you probably know I prefer Moffat Who to RTD Who and when writing up an ep will often make comparisons between the two, generally speaking in Moffat's favour cause, heh, I think it's better. I also prefer Williams to Hinchcliffe and Lambert to Wiles. And while I don't tend to name classic producer eras (except

Comments

[ragdoll]

But surely you know that the only time that rule is allowed is when you're comparing Moffat!Who to RTD!Who and telling everyone HOW MUCH BETTER IT WAS IN THE OLD DAYS WHEN RUSSELL WAS IN CHARGE! *eyeroll*

It's ridiculous for anyone to think that you shouldn't (or worse can't) compare and contrast things to things what have gone before. That's how reviews generally are structured -- otherwise, you've got no standard to go by.

I freely admit I tell people who can only criticise and only watch the show seemingly to bitch about how it's all shit, and they hate it now, and it's ruined, and Moffat Is The Anti-Christ who did it all, that if they're that unhappy, maybe they ought to stop watching, but then again, I tell that to any/all fans of any/all things because I truly don't understand why anyone would be that masochistic. If I stop loving something for whatever reason, I walk away from it and don't spend all my energy bitching at other people who still enjoy it. I don't see it as double standards to say 'if you really don't like this, why are you bothering with it?' *shrugs*

[calapine]

I stuck with SPN for about three years after I stopped enjoying it and House for two, so I get that "it's hard to give up" thing and, besides, back in the day GB was my online Who hangout.

It's ridiculous for anyone to think that you shouldn't (or worse can't) compare and contrast things to things what have gone before.

Because you're being bitter or bashing and making people who liked the stuff you don't unhappy. But I *am* bitter about the stuff that went on with Martha and it's not bashing, I'm not 'hating' for the sake of it, it's perfectly legitimate, reasoned crit saying why I prefer one to the other. And *I'd* be unhappy if I felt I wasn't honestly epxressing my views on my jounral. And of course it's relevant! One of my big fears was that Moff, too, was going to mess up the changeover and it'd be a bit silly to tlak about it and not compare and just...arg!

I should go watch Elementary and coo over Joan's outfits or something.

[eve11]

and making people who liked the stuff you don't unhappy.

Yeah, that's their problem. Like you said, you're not going over to their journals and harshing their squee; you're writing about it in your space, and you are being critical, in the analytic sense of the word. Honestly, I'd say you don't even owe fandom that. There is no obligation to deconstruct one's preferences; it depends on why and how people want to interact with the show. I mean, scientifically speaking, there are facts, and then there are opinions about facts. TV critiques are mostly the latter. But I also think that it is possible within the shifting sands of subjectivity for one to defend against an attack of "you're just a hater" with evidence to the contrary, and I think you've got that argument covered pretty well.

[calapine]

Quite, hence my being rather annoyed.

[calapine]

But surely you know that the only time that rule is allowed is when you're comparing Moffat!Who to RTD!Who and telling everyone HOW MUCH BETTER IT WAS IN THE OLD DAYS WHEN RUSSELL WAS IN CHARGE! *eyeroll*

I have had both that complaint and that any comparisons btwn the two are fuelling some manner of fannish war. So while not all comparisons should stop....something else should happen of which I'm not sure.