These revives share a few points with Zero Punctuation and works as well even thou the visuals could defiantly be experimented with a bit.
--The66Monkey
Just modify the visual style; it's too similar to Bob's or Yahtzee's.
--DrEmo
Good points made but need to change animation style.
--nashty13
I'm not going to get into the ZPish style either, but you may want to mix it up if they hire you.
--Mcoffey
Perhaps a little change in the presentation.
--Mr. Omega
How to put this politely... No. I will not change my presentation. I will not change the way I make these videos. Perhaps if Burn Notice had been my first review, I would, but three months in my style is pretty well established and changing it would not only be difficult, it would create a buffer period of crappy videos while I get my feet under me again. Sorry kids, but I ain't changing now.
And here's something that my harshest critics don't seem to take into account: How very difficult is it for someone to consistently rip off someone else? For those of you that don't know: Very. Once you become comfortable with a style, your own starts to leak in. It happens to everyone who imitates someone else. Hell, it happens to actors on TV shows all the time! On the long-running ones, there might be an episode with a less-strong-than-usual director, and a character or two might inflect or react minorly out of character. It's usually not the actors fault, it's just that there's only so long you can keep something compartmentalized.
And the point of that story was that even if I had started out as a Yahtzee rip-off, the fact that I've consistently produce Yahtzee-like work just means that our styles are similar anyway. So I won't change it. And if you ask again, I'll probably smirk at you.
Which you totally can't see, but trust me, I shall.
While overall I was impressed, my only concern is with regards to doing something like a weekly episode. Currently, it's easy for both Bob Chipman and Ben Croshaw to review their respective media because there is always new content coming out during the year. The question I pose is whether or not you would review new shows only, shows that have a couple seasons under their belt, or a mix up of both. Typically the Escapist reviews "what's hot", so my personal curiosity begs me to ask you.
--Cody D.I gotta say, I loved getting this email. It was polite and grammatically correct, and something about the formal tone just tickled me. Like those times I look at my life and say "I'm really happy that I've cleaned carpets today... I must be an adult." The idea that people can treat me and my work so seriously is massively entertaining and flattering at the same time.
To answer the actual question, though: I want to do primarily current shows, though I have, and will continue to do so, done dead shows. Most of the time these are relevant reviews, which means giving an opinion on something current, however sometimes I need to illustrate a point, or demonstrate some quality in TV, or there's something in the show that I've spoken on before and wanted to critique in a different environment.
Plus, according to my rules, I can review web serieses and miniseries, so I shouldn't lack for material. And shows that have been running for a while would need to be broken up according to how much I can watch in a given week, and, if I can manage it, by internal segmentation of the show.
And then there's the things that'd be marathons. Like if I ever have to review CSI. And someone's requested Law and Order. Things that have spin-offs will be done next to each other, hopefully in the order in which they were started so as to trace the evolution better.
So yeah. Run out of stuff to review? Probably not.
