SUPERNATURAL -- The Brothers Winchester

[VegasRon]

Whomever runs the Coaxial portion of AICN certainly doesn't give a darn about Supernatural. Nor do they show any interest in Smallville.

Supernatural is a superb series. Sure, there have been ups and downs like in all series, but the overall quality of the show has been pretty consistent.

Meanwhile, a show like Fringe gets rabid support from the powers-that-be at AICN. I'm not saying that Fringe isn't deserving of some support - it's an okay show - but, c'mon, Supernatural is in its 6th season and it can't seem to catch a break from AICN.

that moron Herc never gave Supernatural a chance and has actually gone out of his way to insult it. I've been banned a couple of times as a result. Meanwhile, he continues to pimp shit like Survivor. *shrug*

With that said, this season has been very uneven, though last week's ep was really good. Unless something amazing happens, my final opinion is that this show should have ended with season 5. Or just stuck to a monster-of-the-week format, this Mother-of-All storyline bores me.

On a side note, Fringe is a great show.

[VegasRon]

Yeah, it's been a weird sticking point with Herc from what I gather. I've only watched a couple episodes myself, but I know it's pretty popular with the Coaxial fans and each time it gets brought up in TalkBacks the response is always "Go talk about it in the Zone." Which is cool, we certainly welcome the influx of visitors, but I don't get why he refuses to run any Supernatural articles. Maybe he just really, really dislikes the show or something.

That's something I don't understand. I thought that movie and tv critics/reviewers make an effort to review things that they don't like as well as all of the stuff they do like. I could somewhat understand it if a show garnered little or no interest from AICN fans, but Supernatural clearly has a decent sized and devoted following on this website.

Maybe I don't understand how the AICN reviewers do their jobs. Maybe it's normal for them to only do reviews for what they like and are interested in and everyone else who might have different tastes in t.v. and movies are left to go pound sand. That doesn't seem like very professional behavior and I hope I'm wrong about it.

In any event, I'm disappointed that a show with the consistent quality of Supernatural is kicked to the side of the road and ignored by the reviewers at AICN.

As it was explained to me during my first banning, Herc reviews shows HE likes. It isn't an actual review section, more of a blog. Fuck him. SN actually gets a LOT of love from the TBers. At least up through S5.

[LanaLang4Ever]

there are many words one might use to describe the AICN reviewers. "professional" is not one of them.

if you want to know whether a tv series will or won't be covered by Herc on AICN, you have only to ask one simple question: "does it involve, in one fashion or another, j.j. abrams, joss whedon, tina fey, or teenage girls?"

no? then it won't be covered by AICN.

I hope that isn't true. I would hope that an AICN reviewer wouldn't limit himself and the AICN audience to such a narrow and finite selection of material.

What is the point of a movie and t.v. review site like AICN if certain movies and/or television shows are automatically given the cold shoulder?

[LanaLang4Ever]

Yeah, it's been a weird sticking point with Herc from what I gather. I've only watched a couple episodes myself, but I know it's pretty popular with the Coaxial fans and each time it gets brought up in TalkBacks the response is always "Go talk about it in the Zone." Which is cool, we certainly welcome the influx of visitors, but I don't get why he refuses to run any Supernatural articles. Maybe he just really, really dislikes the show or something.

That's something I don't understand. I thought that movie and tv critics/reviewers make an effort to review things that they don't like as well as all of the stuff they do like. I could somewhat understand it if a show garnered little or no interest from AICN fans, but Supernatural clearly has a decent sized and devoted following on this website.

Maybe I don't understand how the AICN reviewers do their jobs. Maybe it's normal for them to only do reviews for what they like and are interested in and everyone else who might have different tastes in t.v. and movies are left to go pound sand. That doesn't seem like very professional behavior and I hope I'm wrong about it.

In any event, I'm disappointed that a show with the consistent quality of Supernatural is kicked to the side of the road and ignored by the reviewers at AICN.

As it was explained to me during my first banning, Herc reviews shows HE likes. It isn't an actual review section, more of a blog. Fuck him. SN actually gets a LOT of love from the TBers. At least up through S5.

Well, if Coaxial is simply a blog, then I guess I can understand the desire to only review whatever happens to tickle the reviewer's fancy. OTOH, if Coaxial is supposed to be a professionally run feature on AICN with professional reviews, then I am more than a little disappointed with its partisan reviews and narrow focus.

[TheBaxter]

once again, AICN is in no way shape or form a "professional" review site. has H@rry ever struck you as professional in any way? how many professional reviewers spend more time in their reviews discussing their childhood, sexual fetishes, physical impairments, or what they had for breakfast that morning, than talking about the film itself? how many professional reviewers compare the film being reviewed to some part of the female anatomy in roughly 37% of their reviews? i remember when the site started out as primarily a rumor/gossip news site and nearly all the reviews the site ran came from anonymous test screeners. now AICN has basically given up on breaking stories, since there are thousands of other sites doing that, as well as TheButcher in here, so they've got a bunch of guys reviewing movies to fill the site up with something, but none of them are professionals, and i don't think they would claim to be either. the same goes for Herc. even when he does post a story about a show, he hardly ever "reviews" it beyond maybe a few sentences of "this is a really good episode" or "this episode kinda sucked." he only really reviews new shows and pilots, and just posts little tidbits of info about the other shows before they air.

[swoop91]

BEST EPISODE EVER.
Marshall Eastwood, Clint Eastwood and this is Walker, Texas Ranger.

[LanaLang4Ever]

once again, AICN is in no way shape or form a "professional" review site. has H@rry ever struck you as professional in any way? how many professional reviewers spend more time in their reviews discussing their childhood, sexual fetishes, physical impairments, or what they had for breakfast that morning, than talking about the film itself? how many professional reviewers compare the film being reviewed to some part of the female anatomy in roughly 37% of their reviews? i remember when the site started out as primarily a rumor/gossip news site and nearly all the reviews the site ran came from anonymous test screeners. now AICN has basically given up on breaking stories, since there are thousands of other sites doing that, as well as TheButcher in here, so they've got a bunch of guys reviewing movies to fill the site up with something, but none of them are professionals, and i don't think they would claim to be either. the same goes for Herc. even when he does post a story about a show, he hardly ever "reviews" it beyond maybe a few sentences of "this is a really good episode" or "this episode kinda sucked." he only really reviews new shows and pilots, and just posts little tidbits of info about the other shows before they air.

If that's true about the reviewer known as 'Herc', how difficult would it be for him to post a Talkback once in a blue moon for Supernatural or Smallville? If he doesn't really do reviews, he could post a few simple blurbs about those shows and then let the AICN community engage in its witty banter on a Talkback, which, from what you're saying, is what I assume happens anyways with most of the shows he reviews.

I have another question: Are the reviewers or critics on AICN paid for the opinions they express about movies and tv shows? If so, they are professionals.

[Chilli]

Supernatural is the perfect blueprint for a B-Movie TV show with A-Movie quality acting.

Latest ep? Fantastic. Twists, turns, great acting and excellent callbacks that features one of the greatest 'gotcha, bitch' moments ever when Dean manages to take down one of the biggest villains of all time via a cunning whisky ruse.

[swoop91]

Also, half the episode I was sure that Cas was impersonating ganked Crowley.

just, my fav villain is back! Mark Shepard how i missed thee

[LanaLang4Ever]

Judging by the lack of responses in this thread, I can see that the love for Supernatural has certainly waned. I can't blame you people for that. The current season has reverted to the 'Monster of the Week' formula that was so prevalent in season 1.

I guess the writers had nowhere to go after a few seasons of "Oh my God, it's the Apocalypse!" type of storylines. But, there's always somewhere else to go. It just takes some creative writing and a willingness to take a chance.

Does anyone foresee Supernatural being able to churn out another season after this season is finished?

[The Vicar]

They keep repeating themselves too much. I've lost track of how many times Dean or Sam has gone to hell,
and comes back next week! Misplaced souls. Where's God ( did Kevin Smith right this?)? Is Sam right in his head? Is Dean?
Cas is a cool character, and I like Bobby, although the show needs more scenes of Bobby banging Sam & Dean's heads together.
And the actors come too close to winking at the camera for my comfort level.
I watched it and wanted to like it, but it just didn't make the necessary connections for me.

[Wolfpack]

And 8 years later, this show is still on.

Although they are throwing in the towel after the upcoming season ends.