I thought NYT hired decent writers, not people who failed to discuss the very show that they were reviewing. She calls the show patronising by including sex, assuming it was added for women and not there from the start, while failing to be anything but patronising herself.
The geekmom review review was very nice though.
The geekmom review review was very nice though.
"I mean, if everyone had a soul, there would be no contrast by which we could appreciate it. For giving us this perspective, we thank you." - Nate
The current GRRM shitstorm: some weirdo on the Game of Thrones series.
15/04/2011 05:46:21 PM
- 2990 Views
Horrbile review, if you can call it that.
15/04/2011 06:48:45 PM
- 1085 Views
The NYT review was internally inconsistent and largely incoherent.
15/04/2011 07:34:57 PM
- 1529 Views
My god, that was painful
15/04/2011 11:02:11 PM
- 986 Views
The original reviewer appears not only to be an outdated snob but an idiot
16/04/2011 11:51:29 PM
- 873 Views
Wow. Very opinionated. It would be offensive if I cared about what she thought but I don't.
18/04/2011 02:08:52 AM
- 863 Views
That's an interesting question.
18/04/2011 04:33:48 AM
- 819 Views
It mostly irks me that women will read this and think, "I shouldn't bother with that show."
18/04/2011 07:07:13 AM
- 917 Views