Bradley Babendir

I don’t disagree with your points, but this article exists in a world where networks cancel bad shows and keep good ones. That’s a nice world, but it’s not a world we live in. None of those things matter in the least if the show is garnering viewership or otherwise making its studio and network money. These might be reasons that the show is bad, but it’s certainly not reasons the show should be cancelled.

What do you mean all of the better movies were sequels or remakes? That’s just plainly false.

If they do a show about Bruce Wayne, and they want to smart about it, it shouldn’t have anything to do with his heroism or violence or learning different skills to become Batman. That’s played out.

It should be a show about dealing with grief and everything from the moment his parents are shot in the alleyway to right before he starts to learn his skills.

Wayne is an incredibly interesting character, but the most interesting parts about him aren’t often shown. He’s basically a guy who goes around fighting criminals in a costume because he doesn’t have any other way to deal with his parents’ murder. I think a series that dealt with his psychological problems exclusively would be fascinating.

Have you seen the film? Brandon’s issues with sex are akin to a cocaine habit. This film has nothing to do with Male Chastity. His relationship with sex is destructive and consuming.

I appreciate the idea behind the article, but I think the manner in which the question is both posed and discussed is rather unproductive, or at least not the most productive.

In my opinion, this is not the appropriate light with which to view film criticism. This article is predicated on the fact that some views are right and some views are wrong. Certainly, using “popular opinion” as the marker is better than no marker at all, but it doesn’t give much credit to the people who disagree.

A true “contrarian” review is nothing more than trolling and it is not at all important. It’s completely valueluess. We well argued, well thought negative review has a great deal of value, or at least the same amount of value that the more common reviews have.

This is quite a dangerous endeavor, and sex doesn’t really seem to be a remote problem. Nobody would blink if this game treated sex in the exact same fashion as every other game has that came before it, I think. People know what to expect.

However, taking on a project that likely involves telling a new story is work for the insane. The fanbase is so active and passionate that mucking it up would be a disaster.

I really, honestly and thoroughly disagree with this article and its argument. It’s an incredibly short-sighted picture of film history that misunderstands almost everything that’s happened before now. All of the things that are supposed to be “wrong” with film have been wrong since it started. As well, technological innovation has always been incredibly important, and facilitated narrative innovation. The same thing happens now.

I think that your assertion that a show can’t get by with an unlikeable lead is false. It doesn’t appear to be essential to your point, and I like the piece overall, but I think that initial idea is incorrect, or at least incomplete.

A lead can certainly be unlikeable. Don Draper is unlikeable. Walter White is unlikeable. The lead has to be interesting and the lead has to be understandable. But they don’t have to be likable.