My view on the reviews...

[Dekion]

OK, I think there have been 6 reviews for Rangers thus far. One here at B5LR.com (positive), one at Cinescape (negative), one at IGN (negative), one at SciFi Weekly (positive) and two at Ain't it Cool News (one positive and one negative). That is 3 to 3.
The Cinescape negative review still gave it a C+ (which is an above average mark) but complained constantly. It makes me wonder how negative it really was.
I am not going to consider the ones from AICN, cause they obviously don't know what they are talking about if they have to conflicting reviews of the same material. That leaves the IGN negative, the positive here and the positive at SciFi Weekly. The guy at IGN seemed to be slightly biased (as he complained at how bad the effects were for all B5 incarnations). I think his could have been a "to each their own" situation. I trust SciFi weekly alot, as most of their reviews I have read I have agreed with. I also trust Antony, as our interests obviously similar to antonys (thus this web site). I am going to judge for myself (and am about to pee myself in excitement) but reviews from people that may or may not have hidden agenda's do not do alot for me.

here is hoping we have another great series on the way.

------------------

 

[Chris Springob]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dekion:
The Cinescape negative review still gave it a C+ (which is an above average mark) but complained constantly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, he gave it a C-.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>
I am not going to consider the ones from AICN, cause they obviously don't know what they are talking about if they have to conflicting reviews of the same material.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AICN is more or less a forum for people with advance access to genre projects to post their views. Neither of their Rangers reviews were from AICN regulars. The fact that the two reviewers had different opinions is no more odd than two people at this site having different opinions.


------------------

 

[Dekion]

Good point, but then they should reference each other review to show that they care about the multiple opinion theory. The would be more responsible.
I have seen many sites that say (if you liked this article, see {insert name here}s article here) where here is a link.


------------------

 

[Cerberus]

There is also a review at the Hollywood Reporter. This was a positive review. Here is the link.
www.hollywoodreporter.com/hollywoodreporter/reviews/index.jsp

That makes it 4 positive, 3 negative.

Here is the ending:

There's a fine buildup of suspense about this new enemy, and given that regular viewers know that "B5" stories are often episodic, there's little disappointment at the ending of "Rangers."

4 to 3 Rangers

------------------

 

[Dekion]

On the C- issue, I copy pasted to read it and I must have misread it. Thanks...

On the two different reviews thing, we do not represent B5LR in any way, but the people doing reviews on Aint It Cool News do, which makes Ain't It Cool News look pretty unprofessional (which is a no brainer).


------------------

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

The cast (well a few) also reviewed the movie if you remember.

But that can be counted as slightly biased as well methinks.

------------------
Marc Cosgrove

"From chaos, order came. As was inevitable." -Summoning light

 

[hypatia]

I really completely stopped reading the anonymous reviews after one of the “reviewers” admitted he had a conflict of interest between his job and giving out his opinion about the movie. When I thought about it, I realized that just about all of these anonymous “reviewers” might have a veritable ton of hidden agenda items. There is just no way to know if the reviewer won’t confess his identity.

I admit I never pay much attention to reviews anyway. I like some 2-star movies and hate several 4-star movies. It’s all a matter of taste. I do think that JMS sounds like he has more than his fair share of auto-bashers following him around, though. Although his is a dirty business, maybe it is more common than I realize.

I admit I did read Antony’s review, simply because I feel like I’ve gotten to know Antony and was curious about his opinion. But any old crazy who manages to get his hands on an early copy, I am not interested in!

------------------
"The Bible is a book: it is a good book, but is is not the only book" - Inherit the Wind

"I do not believe that the same God who
has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."—Galileo

hypatia@b5fan.b5lr.com

 

[Chris Springob]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dekion:

On the two different reviews thing, we do not represent B5LR in any way, but the people doing reviews on Aint It Cool News do, which makes Ain't It Cool News look pretty unprofessional (which is a no brainer).

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know about that. Even when their in-house reviewers tackle something, you usually get several of them reviewing the same thing. That's just showcasing multiple points of view. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.


------------------