I am breaking down Tim Goodman of the Hollywood Reporter's review of the HBO TV series Game Of Thrones (season 2) I selected This review because it fits - I am reviewing a TV show for my paper, I am a huge fan of the show, yet I've heard next to nothing about what others have to say about it.
For those who don't know - Game of Thrones is a period-piece (think - King Arthur), which has everything from sexual misconduct to dragons and sword-play.
Mr Goodman's review begins by slamming genres a bit..claiming in essence that fantasy and science fiction are no match for good old fashioned dramas. He backs it up with facts if you believe in the worth of award shows and Hollywood honors in general. He does a good job building up the show by knocking it down or at least knocking down the shows seemingly in its' mold. The shows referenced happen to be shows that I've also been a big fan of in Lost, Deadwood and the X Files. So, I was certainly curious to see how my latest time-waster rates.
I was mildly intrigued that certain aspects of the show, while not necessarily mind-blowing with the delivery of a fatal sword fight, received mention in the review. However, I was mostly pleased that the reviewer felt or feels like I do. That thought is that this she is a bona fide hit and is hopefully hear to stay.
I am not so shallow that I only focus on the same opinions as my own. Tim Goodman was inherently clear in his assessment of Game of Thrones season2. He reminded me of of highlights already forgotten from the early part of the season and I can't turn off italics on my computer!!!!
I'm out of time....I guess I'm the dude that turns the very first assignment at 12:00. For shame
Better next time.
get your Game of Thrones on here
2 comments:
Jim,
You make a really good point here: "He backs it up with facts if you believe in the worth of award shows and Hollywood honors in general." What you're doing is essentially questioning the appeal to authority the reviewer makes, suggesting that simply including facts, hard data, etc. isn't necessarily enough or perhaps valuable enough to convince the average reader. The response critics/the Academy/other professional review guilds and groups aren't necessarily based on elements that the average viewer considers, at least not on the whole. Basically, I like that you pay attention to the kind of evidence the writer uses.
I loved reading this because I imagined your voice throughout the whole post and it was entertaining haha. But in my opinion, I think you should have explained more about what the critic actually said rather than just describing what you personally thought of it. But overall, you showed that you knew exactly what the critic was talking since you said you watch this show.
Post a Comment