I was excited to see that Netflix’s Castlevania: Nocturne was reviewing extremely well, a 100% on Rotten Tomatoes, living up to the high scores of the previous show, one of the best game adaptations of all time.
    • RickyRigatoni@lemmy.ml
      14·
      1 year ago

      Or just not care about other peoples opinions on things and just watch what catches your eye. If it doesn’t seem interesting by the nth episode just drop it.

      • RandoCalrandian@kbin.social
        21·
        1 year ago

        That’s time wasted and you’re usually manipulated into it anyway with cliffhangers and flashy visuals instead of quality content.

        If something is going to face plant like game of thrones, I want to know in the beginning before I get invested. All forms of marketing are geared toward hiding those face plants to drive viewership, but it’s the only metric people really care about: is this movie essentially longform clickbait that isn’t going to pay off in the end, like so much of the other shit coming out recently

        • LemmyNoKiseki
          2·
          1 year ago

          On the other hand, pretty much anything I’ve ever disliked I’ve discovered through reviews or mentions online, while nearly everything I liked I’ve just stumbled upon myself.

    • GrayBackgroundMusic@lemm.eeEnglish
      4·
      1 year ago

      Critic reviews are useless because they are largely just ads bought and paid for.

      Also because they usually judge criteria differently. They watch a lot of movies and are looking for things the average person isn’t.

    • SitD@feddit.de
      21·
      1 year ago

      that’s going to cap your bandwidth to what your friends have time to watch… not criticizing, i do the same, but honestly fuck bribed reviewers.

  • paultimate14@lemmy.world
    224·
    1 year ago

    Pretty standard stuff. A handful of bigots go ahead and review bomb stuff they hate.

    Usually that’s an indicator that the show is really great. Personally I thought the original Castlevania series was fantastic, so I’m looking Forward to watching this one.

    Powerhouse Animation is usually worth watching for the visuals alone.

  • sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz
    10·
    1 year ago

    I finished Nocturne last night and it was…eh? Well it’s half a show isn’t it? It’s the same as the OG Netflix Castlevania S1, where they set all the pieces up for S2, so I’m willing to wait it out and see where it goes. The 53% does feel accurate to me as a score honestly, even though I’d personally put it at like ~60%.

    The highlight of the show for me was Richter and Maria’s interactions in episode 1, and I thought we would get more of that than we actually did. I don’t mind Annette, but like…I wish we got more RICHTER (and Maria, Tera, and Orlox by extension) and saved Annette’s story for later.

    It also just …weirdly felt too rushed and too slow simultaneously. 8 episodes was not enough for the story they wanted to tell, and I wish they just focused on the Belmont side for now.

    • Disonantezko@lemmy.sdf.org
      3·
      1 year ago

      It’s a lose adaptation of next Alucard/Belmont saga:

      • Rondo of Blood.
      • Symphony of the night.
      • Bloodlines (just some enemies like Countess Bathory and Drolza).
      • I did enjoy it, nice production, some poor writing some times, but not 100% nor 50‰, to me it’s like 75% at least.
      • It’s not like source (games) has awesome writing, just a motivation to kill enemy every game.
      • I really hope when finishing this adaptation, they follow with next and final Alucard arc in the future (our present).
    • gullible@kbin.social
      31·
      1 year ago

      It’s the weird scene arrangement. Had opera gone to hell at the end of the season, it would have been paced infinitely better and, moreover, it would have been much more poignant. Contrasting the incoming with the outgoing would have been interesting. As you said, I’ll forgive it if they can meaningfully expand on their story in the next season.

  • pimento64@sopuli.xyz
    3429·
    1 year ago

    While many people actually just say the quiet part out loud, it’s too “woke,” others code it with the “bad writing, bad characters” claim. The writing of course being the “woke” parts, mainly, the characters being those of color, usually.

    This paranoid lunatic really believes that criticism of a show’s writing and characters is some kind of dogwhistle. The first series of Castlevania was decent, but very silly; it was a 6/10 at the absolute highest. Or, if I was a character from Castlevania, I would say “the first FUCKING series of Castlevania was DAMN decent, but very FUCKING silly and SHIT; it was a DAMN 6 out of BITCH 10 at the absolute FUCKING highest”. It’s not a particularly amazing series and this one is worse, as continuations are wont to be.

    Considering this is a Forbes article, my assumption is that this is a bought-and-paid-for PR statement. Why would you post anything from this corporate rag in the first place, OP?

      • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
        98·
        1 year ago

        And it doesn’t raise red flags that someone was pissy enough over bad reviews to go and publish an entire article to cry that everyone leaving bad reviews is just racist?

      • pimento64@sopuli.xyz
        716·
        1 year ago

        Your reaction was so angry and so strong. It raises red flags man lol

        Oh, give me a break. This is obviously a reach on your part, because if your personality was so blandly milquetoast that you actually think this, you wouldn’t be the kind of person who uses histrionics like you just did. I don’t know what your angle is but at least be internally consistent.

    • Solarius@lemmy.sdf.org
      113·
      1 year ago

      I never finished the first show but I thought it was cool. At least a 7 for me. This Forbes review is specifically citing the reviews that complained about “modern day talking points” so I don’t doubt they’re at least partially correct. The show is probably mediocre to begin with but there’s also righties getting worked up over it. I guess I’ll have to watch it and see if it’s any good.

      • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
        59·
        1 year ago

        What’s wrong with complaining that a show puts talking points (or however you’d like to refer to the concept) over quality?

        • Solarius@lemmy.sdf.org
          74·
          1 year ago

          Again I haven’t seen the show yet but usually when people say that it just means there was a black/queer character and it made them angy

          • gullible@kbin.social
            101·
            1 year ago

            Without spoilers, there’s melanin, gayness, and even character flaws. You were spot on.

              • gullible@kbin.social
                21·
                1 year ago

                Low quality? No, not in the least. It was adequate setup for a 3-4 season show. The emotional arcs would have been fantastic if they had been given any amount of time to breathe or if there had been more visible development between certain characters, but that’s not what the complaints are about, are they? What, my good chud, are they complaining about in their reviews? Do feel free to pull your mask off, you’re among friends.

                • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  Anyway, try reading the link before you try and use it to back you up.

                  It doesn’t work, everything feels forced and the characters are just stupid

                  Looks like the writers are riding the series’ success to write their own fanfiction now.

                  and I agree that there are cringe-like dialogues in places and probably too much time was given to characters who did not deserve it, while the main villain was given almost no time and no development

                  I don’t understand how many more shows have to be given to incompetent writers until studios decide they had enough. This is not Castlevania, this is disrespect.

                  This is a watchable series. But this is merely a shadow of the original Castlevania series. Writing is not that good and most of the villains are one dimensional and hard to connect with. Heroes are sometimes appear as more than one dimensional characters and sometimes not. Hard to connect with the heroes for the most of the time. Story is not adult oriented other than blood, gore and sex scenes. Generally average or below average series that is unable to follow the standards of the original.

                  Strayed too far from the source material it might have well just called it something else. It’s literally someone else fanfiction riding off the Castlevania name

                  Nothing related to the games and full of bad writing. Makes 90s mario bros film feels like a accurate adaptation.

                  The main characters just aren’t that interesting or fun to watch. The writing and pacing is all over the place.

                • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
                  11·
                  1 year ago

                  Sorry, I didn’t realize you were the grand arbiter of quality, selected by the universe to be the one true source of objective judgement on the topic.

    • Silverseren@kbin.social
      42·
      1 year ago

      So, in short, you didn’t bother to look at the user reviews in question that are full of right wing morons complaining about wokeness?

      My assumption is that you are also a moron.

  • abysmalpoptart@lemmy.world
    41·
    1 year ago

    I really don’t find rt to be useful. Take away the fact that critics are being paid to give positive reviews, it’s just a measure of like versus dislike, so 100% of critics liking it is really just saying every critic thought the show was at least decent, but it doesn’t give me any sort of scale. It’s like a giant pass fail, but there’s no indication of whether the show barely passed across the board, or was actually quite good.

    That being said, have not seen this series yet, but plan to

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      2·
      1 year ago

      Critic and audience scores are more and less important depending on the movie.

      Do you want to find movies that are well done, break new ground, or include the tropes that critics love? Critic reviews are helpful.

      Do you want something that is well done in a genre that critics tend to look down on, like horror or comedy? Audience reviews are helpful.

      But any kind of score aggregation of either group is far less useful than reading a review that clarifies whether the movie includes things you like a lnd whether they are well done. A horror movie that has reviews that mention frequent jump scares will drive me away because I don’t like them that much unless they are frequent and well done. Someone else might want to see it because that is what they enjoy!

      • ThunderingJerboa@kbin.social
        2·
        1 year ago

        Yeah I think many people sort of ignore many critics see a ton of movies so when you get ones that are all very trope and cliche, it may be a fun rump but a critic probably would have seen many of them prior. At the end of the day movie reviewing is a job and you are probably going to get sick of shit you see on repeat over and over with just a slap of paint on top of it. Typically the reason why comedies and horror films probably get slapped the hardest by critic reviews.

        • snooggums@kbin.social
          2·
          1 year ago

          Some critics also focus more on whether the movie is trying something new rather than doing what it is trying to do well.

          It isn’t like they mark a drama down for doing stereotypical drama stuff over and over and over again like they do with comedies or horror. Comedies and horror tend to suffer from people not all finding the same stuff funny or horrifying, while anyone can say drama is drama even if it is melodramatic with manufactured drama.