Review Roundup - "The Mentalists" and "Slash Fiction" | The Winchester Family Business

Review Roundup - "The Mentalists" and "Slash Fiction"

Wednesday, 09 November 2011 00:17 |

Last Updated on Thursday, 10 November 2011 17:44 | Written by Alice Jester |

Supernatural is an extraordinary show. We all know this. It inspires a passion, an excitement, a fervor like few others. Mo became a huge fan of the show in season four. She’s been nothing but a big friend to Supernatural and given it a nationally recognized critical spotlight. Yes, that love has gone a bit sour, especially after season six, but she really does care about the show. All of her tough criticisms of late, they’re out of genuine concern and love for Supernatural. This isn’t me guessing. We’ve had recent conversations. Her latest review is very controversial, but just the way it’s delivered, it should prove how much emotional investment she has in Supernatural.

After reading some of the comments left on her review, I just wanted to cry. Mo is a very good person and doesn’t deserve this crap. No reviewer does. Some forget their humanity when hiding behind a computer. These comments were mechanisms for taking personal potshots and criticizing harshly her integrity as a critic, even though she has years of solid work ahead of this. I recognize it may not have been the most professional review, but why is she not allowed to make a passionate plea for a show that she loves? Why is she not allowed to do something out of turn once in a while? Maybe it’s not her normal behavior, and I’ll admit it was emotionally charged, but did anyone think that perhaps there’s a reason behind the frustration? Benefit of the doubt doesn’t seem to exist in this online world. People just love to trash. Most fans were so receptive to the attention she brought the show when the comments were good. Quite frankly, some of these angry fans scare me.

I know how it is though. I had an issue like Mo once, although on a much much smaller scale. I wrote a off the cuff, misguided review on “Sex and Violence” on my way home from New York Comic Con which pissed off a huge contingent of Dean fans. I wrote that review almost three years ago. People to this day still throw that in my face. Once you piss off some Supernatural fans, you’re scarred for life. Also, I’ve had writers come and go here with great frustrations because Supernatural stopped being the show they fell in love with. Breaking up with a show is hard. It really is like losing a love in a relationship.

I doubt you’ll see Mo writing another thing about Supernatural. Who knows, maybe down the road in season nine or something like that. I know many of you will say “good riddance” but not I. She’s been a fantastic colleague in this fandom and been very good for our show. She may be a professional critic, but she’s also a fan girl too. I’m very, very sad if we lose her and the wisdom she brought to her analysis of Supernatural.

The Mentalists - http://www.aoltv.com/2011/11/05/supernatural-season-7-episode-7-recap/
Slash Fiction - http://www.aoltv.com/2011/10/29/supernatural-season-7-episode-6-recap/

In case you missed it too, here's her article on "Tough Love For Supernatural" which stemmed for our conversation at Chicon along with Lynn and Kathy at Fangasm. I'm quoted in there directly and stand by every word.

As for the other links, Gerry Weaver is the new Supernatural reviewer for Blogcritics (taking the slot I vacated), and I couldn’t be happier. She has a nice, fresh view of the show that’s sorely needed. Read this reply on my recent review of “The Mentalists.” Talk about a refreshing POV.

Here are the links for “Slash Fiction” and “The Mentalists”, as well as a “checkup” on Supernatural season seven so far. All good stuff!

“The Mentalists” - http://blogcritics.org/video/article/tv-review-supernatural-the-mentalists/
“Slash Fiction” - http://blogcritics.org/video/article/tv-review-supernatural-slash-fiction/
Seventh Season Checkup - http://blogcritics.org/video/article/supernaturals-seventh-season-check-up/

Tina Charles of TV Guide calls “Slash Fiction” her favorite of season seven so far (except for the last scene). She liked “The Mentalists” but is hoping so see some more mythology episodes soon. I can’t disagree with that!

“The Mentalists” - http://www.tvguide.com/tvshows/supernatural-2011/episode-7-season-7/the-mentalists/192272
“Slash Fiction” - http://www.tvguide.com/tvshows/supernatural-2011/episode-6-season-7/slash-fiction/192272

Here’s Nicole’s reviews on Salted and Burned. I got to spend some time with Nicole in Chicago and I think she’s got an amazing mind for analysis and TV criticism. She certainly knows her X-Files!

“The Mentalists” - http://saltedandburned.com/2011/11/ramblings-on-episode-7x07-the-mentalist-spoilers/
“Slash Fiction” - http://saltedandburned.com/2011/11/ramblings-on-episode-7x06-slash-fiction-spoilers/

I also got to meet SweetOnDean in Chicago too! She has a great review for “The Mentalists” and shows in detail why she loved this episode so much.

http://sweetondean.blogspot.com/2011/11/review-supernatural-707-mentalists.html

Clarissa from TV Overmind loved the season one feel of “The Mentalists” and liked “Slash Fiction” although found the ending disappointing.

“The Mentalists” - http://tvovermind.zap2it.com/supernatural-tv-news/supernatural-season-7-episode-7-the-mentalists-review/102880
“Slash Fiction” - http://tvovermind.zap2it.com/supernatural-tv-news/supernatural-review-season-7-episode-6-slash-fiction-recap/101496

Bekah from Support Supernatural had some great things to say as well about both episodes.

“The Mentalists” - http://www.supportsupernatural.com/s7e7review.htm
“Slash Fiction” - http://www.supportsupernatural.com/s7e6review.htm

I’ve been negligent in sharing this link for a while. Check out the always entertaining “Stream of Consciousness” from Gaelicspirit.

“The Mentalists” - http://gaelicspirit.livejournal.com/125364.html
“Slash Fiction” - http://gaelicspirit.livejournal.com/124765.html

You know, this is terrible for me to lose track, but someone here on this site in some comment shared a link about someone who does visual type reviews on Livejournal. If anyone knows what I’m talking about, please share the link here. I’d love to check those out and recommend for the future.

Share any links I missed here! I know there are plenty. All opinions are welcome too about anything else I’ve said here too, but please, keep it civil. I’d like to see all of us put this ugliness behind us and have a fresh start.

For all the latest Supernatural info and article links, follow The Winchester Family Business on Twitter at @WinFamBusiness

< Prev		Next >

Comments

# rmoats8621 2011-11-09 01:21

Oh, Alice. This thing with Mo has gotten SO out of hand. I wrote in the comments section on her article tonight that I hope she will stick with it and give it a little longer. She's a great critic and even though I don't agree with her all the time, she does really care about Supernatural. That is truly apparent. You could really see that at PaleyFest last March, too.

This situation is so sad. Everyone is still so polarized over this Amy matter. It's like a wound that won't heal. Personally, I've had enough and I'm ready to move on. Let's see what this wedding is about and laugh some! Some of us really need it! Lighten up, folks!

Oh, and thanks for all that you do, Alice! I really appreciate your views and thank you for sharing them. Many times you have brought up something that I didn't see or didn't even think about while watching an episode. When I re-watched the episode later on, it made it all the better. Also, you have one of the best sites. I always enjoy the articles, etc. You've got quite a talented staff! Take a bow. You deserve it!

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# paintgirl770 2011-11-09 12:23

THIS

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# sylvia37 2011-11-09 02:50

It's really scary how the internet has brought out the crazy in people. It's obvious that anonimity makes people think they can say things they would never dream of saying to someone's face.

Thanks for the round-up Alice.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# A 2011-11-09 07:18

Alice, I think that the fandom has a low tolerance in general for character-bashing. Mo's language about the brothers, and the way she framed her criticisms, sounded like the kind of biased bashing you'd read on a fansite dedicated to love of one of the brothers and hatred of the other. (In this case, since she was calling Dean a bully and Sam a victim, I guess that hypothetical board would be something like Limp!Sam.)

Fans have had a lot of discussions over the course of 7 years, and they are attuned to the difference between writing-focused criticism versus a fan being upset at a character not being punished or validated enough to satisfy their feelings. Mo's post sounded a lot more like the latter than the former, and I think that set the tone for the responses she got.

I like Mo well enough, but the rest of us have to watch our words every day when we talk to other fans. We know what's going to sound biased, or hurtful, and so we make sure to be as articulate and clear as possible about what we're thinking. When we don't, we get a backlash. It's just part of talking to other people; you can say whatever you want, but you can't say it without getting a response. So if you want a thoughtful response, you make a thoughtful post. If you want an angry response, you make an angry and unfair post.

I have to say, though, I went back through a lot of the comments and came up with maybe 5 that were really out of line toward her, and a couple that were out of line towards people who disagree with her. There was a LOT of disagreement with her sentiments, but I think for the most part that that comment section has been reasonably polite. It's just that the bad apples stand out more. :)

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Ginger 2011-11-09 08:43

I agree with this post, Alice. Your review had much of the same criticism as Mo's, but your's came off much more as a thoughtful criticism. Mo's didn't. And, yes, I know exactly how frustrated she is, because I felt the same way all through S6, but she surely had to know that in clearly stating one brother was a victim and one was a bully, that she would get comments back. As #A said, I found there were only a few that were out of line, but a LOT that clearly stated their opposing viewpoint.

Anyway, that you for doing these review roundups. I really appreciate that I can come to one place and find all the links to other reviewers.

I, like you, am more than ready to get back to the Levi, the supernatural part of the show, and away from the campy comedy.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# seaSPN 2011-11-09 19:54

A,
I agree. I also read a lot of the posts at AOL and I thought many were well thought out. Some got into Samgirl, Deangirl stuff but that seems to be pretty common in this fandom.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# cathy123 2011-11-10 08:45

Quoting A:

I like Mo well enough, but the rest of us have to watch our words every day when we talk to other fans. We know what's going to sound biased, or hurtful, and so we make sure to be as articulate and clear as possible about what we're thinking. When we don't, we get a backlash. It's just part of talking to other people; you can say whatever you want, but you can't say it without getting a response. So if you want a thoughtful response, you make a thoughtful post. If you want an angry response, you make an angry and unfair post.

This.

Mo's been in fandom long enough to understand how passionate fans are-whether they be Dean, Sam, Cas, bibro, whatever- about the show. I thought her review was pretty disrespectful not just to Dean but to his fans as well. Just because Mo is in a position where she can say whatever she wants doesn't mean she should.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Kat 2011-11-11 01:08

Quoting cathy123:

Quoting A:
I like Mo well enough, but the rest of us have to watch our words every day when we talk to other fans. We know what's going to sound biased, or hurtful, and so we make sure to be as articulate and clear as possible about what we're thinking. When we don't, we get a backlash. It's just part of talking to other people; you can say whatever you want, but you can't say it without getting a response. So if you want a thoughtful response, you make a thoughtful post. If you want an angry response, you make an angry and unfair post.

This.

Mo's been in fandom long enough to understand how passionate fans are-whether they be Dean, Sam, Cas, bibro, whatever- about the show. I thought her review was pretty disrespectful not just to Dean but to his fans as well. Just because Mo is in a position where she can say whatever she wants doesn't mean she should.

This was also my first reaction when I read Mo's review. I felt like I was reading a post by a disgruntled fan on a fan board, not a professional review by a savvy critic. We've all learned to watch what we say in order to be clear and not character bash. Mo crossed that line. Considering how long she's been in the genre fan pool, I'd have thought she would have learned this a long time ago. I guess sometimes a refresher is needed.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# cd28 2011-11-09 08:08

I just wanted to express my support for Mo's review. I've read it three times, and still nothing jumps out at me as being out of line. She's a journalist, and journalists are supposed to be critical. It's their job. She's not saying Dean "is" a dick. She's saying in that scene, he acted like a dick (the exact same word he used to describe Sam). The fact that she's drawing attention to his behavior means that she doesn't think it is typical, and that the recent writing of him is doing a disservice to his character. Journalists aren't supposed to be afraid of raising controversy. They'll get just as much blame if they don't raise flags when deserved. The question journalists need to ask themselves is whether the criticism they're raising is fair. In this case, I think it is.

Another point is that if she wasn't highly respected, she wouldn't have gotten half the response that she did. I'm sure there are more people who read the review and agreed with at least some of her points, but didn't respond in the comments because they weren't motivated by outrage and didn't want to jump into that mess.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Grammarella 2011-11-09 10:12

You know Mo's reviews aren't my cup of tea, but I understand from her "Tough Love" article and from you that she's coming from a place where she cares. I appreciate that. Certainly, she is entitled to her opinion, whatever it may be. Sometimes anger breeds anger, as is the human condition. But I am sorry for her being attacked in a way that hurts her.

Since I don't enjoy her reviews, I ignore them (unless, as a point of discussion on this site, I have a reason to read a particular one). That's it. She has others that agree with her, and that's fine too. What I'm trying to say here is that no matter how much I disagree with her, I wish her the best whatever she decides to do.

And "Sex and Violence" is actually my least favorite episode, funnily enough.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# percysowner 2011-11-09 10:24

I do feel for Mo. I usually don't care for her reviews and I only check them out in a cursory manner. I also had problems with this episode that most of the critics didn't so I've been reading and not commenting. I will go and reread Mo's column because she is one of the few reviewers who shared my feeling that Dean WAS too hard on Sam during that scene. However, I have been less unhappy with this season as a whole than she is and you are.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Sharon 2011-11-09 10:52

I often do like Mos reviews even though I might not agree with everything. Going off a little bit at the deep end at her is not really going to achieve anything.
I thought the amy sl was unproductive , aimless there was potential in it somewhere but it was missed.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Sylvie 2011-11-09 11:27

Thanks for sharing with the review roundup Alice. I follow a few of the ones you mention, like Sweetondean and Saltedandburned. I don't really read Mo Ryan's reviews. I'm just not that curious as to what she has to say. But I'm very sorry to hear that people are trashing her online. Anonymity breeds very ill manners sometimes.

I've already posted on your review that it's better for her to walk away than to continue with a show that doesn't bring her pleasure anymore. I wish her luck and I think it's time for this storm to blow over already. Brings on the wedding!

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# tigerlily2 2011-11-09 15:00

Thanks for the review round-up Alice. There are several of these I still need to read. And by the way, I would love to read your controversial review of Sex and Violence. I was not in fandom then, but it is, although a very difficult episode to watch, one of my very favorites from a writing perspective.

I don't know why people are so astonished that Mo posted such a strongly worded review. I mean, this is Supernatural we're talking about, right? It's a show that has always, ALWAYS brought out strong feelings in its fans. The whole Amy arc of the show was about trust, betrayal, lying, hurt, guilt, anger, honesty and forgiveness. It's a testament to the show's ability to make us care that it gets us all up in arms over our beloved characters and the things that happen to them.

And let's face it, the best reviewers are fans. Why would they bother otherwise? As fans, they have the most insight into the characters. They have watched most closely. Their reviews matter more to the rest of us.

So Mo was mad at Dean for a minute. Let's not burn her at the stake. I read a live chat of people posting during the episode, and they were mad at Dean for a minute too. Then in a couple of days, they were back to normal, talking about all the other elements of the episode.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# seaSPN 2011-11-09 17:45

I appreciate that Ms. Ryan cares for the show and I've agreed with some of her criticisms. Several weeks ago she indicated she might stop reviewing SPN. I know it's hard and takes courage to write reviews and opinions that are subject to criticism.

The latest review seemed quite emotional, which is her right. However, I believe she could anticiapte some emotional commments in response. She knows her audience. I think there are a lot of thoughtful posts to her article as well.

Anyway, Saturday night I looked at her review and I was expecting she'd like the Mentalist. The writing was decent, funny, there was an attempt at continuity and, for the moment, the brothers made up and they had a win against the MOTW. I thought lots of fans wanted the brothers to stop fighting and start hunting monsters again. I thought the last 2 eps expecially were getting the show on a good track.

I understand Ms. Ryan wants the show to be as good as it can, so do I. But I was not happy with her harsh portrayal of Dean. Dean was absolutely IC in my opinion. Ms. Ryan was wrong to state as fact that Amy was "an unarmed woman." She was a monster with claws who killed 4 humans.

I like Sam and Dean, flaws and all. I think the actors try to protect their character's integrity. It's hard to be open to a review when I find some of the language and tone needlessly upsetting and uncalled for.

As I keep saying, I just started posting here in the last couple of weeks. Sorry for not being articulate.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# jace 2011-11-09 19:08

I am very sad about the situation with Mo Ryan. I have occasionally read her reviews but I haven't for awhile because I wasn't enjoying them so much this season. (see how easy that is, people) I have read them now via the links. I cannot for the life of me understand why some posters think it is OK to personally attack an actual person for the criticism of a fictional character. As far as I know Mo didn't attack anyone. There are a lot of bullies on the internet and in fandom specifically.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# CitizenKane2 2011-11-10 02:51

Somehow, I'm always the last to know.

As someone not resident in the US, I had (at best) a vague impression of the controversy that Maureen Ryan's review of "The Mentalists" generated.

Thanks to this compilation, I actually read the full the review. I have to say that whatever one may think of the Mentalists, one has to give credit for her honesty. I do believe that she wrote what she genuinely thought of that episode.

And personally speaking, although I don't agree with some of the views (which 2 individuals agree on everything anyway ? :P), I found her review to be "balanced" - I did not find her reivew to be excessively emotional. In other words, I did enjoy reading her review, even if I didn't agree with parts (well, large parts) of it.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# lola 2011-11-10 08:30

Alice, while I respect your defense of your friend, I have to disagree that the critical comments after Mo's article were unwarranted. First of all, as "A" said, the vast majority of the posters were arguing against her review, not Mo personally. If you want to see bashing, check out her article from earlier this week on actors who deserve better shows. There's some pretty brutal replies there from fans of other shows.

Secondly, what did Mo expect when she called Dean a bully, a dick, said that he acted like a self righteous ass, emotionally manipulated Sam, put on a martyr act, etc? I've seen the passion of Sam fans and I can guarantee it wouldn't have been any different had she said those things about Sam. Trashing one of the lead characters is just not cool, especially when it's not the first time she's done it. She hated Dean in "Girl" and she's slammed him before in other episodes. One time, maybe I could say she was just mad. But repeatedly? Nope, I can't buy that excuse. I'm with those who think Mo just can't stand Dean and that bias is influencing her reviews. That might be okay for a fan blogger but I'd hope for a more balanced, fair approach from a professional critic.

I thought Mo's criticisms of both last season and this one brought up some very valid points. And obviously, she can say whatever she wants about the show. But if Mo's going to hate on only one of the characters and use such emotionally charged insults, I don't see how she can be surprised when fans of that character get upset.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# tigerlily2 2011-11-10 09:14

Oh, dear. I just looked at the comments to Mo Ryan's review of "The Mentalists" and I see that my first opinion was rather Pollyannaish. What an embarrassing free-for-all. I will be surprised if Mo ever writes another word about Supernatural.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Jordan 2011-11-10 09:35

I agree with what "A" posted above that I don't think many of the comments were nasty. They were, however, critical of Ms. Ryan's article. Mo is supposed to be a professional television critic and journalist, not an emotional fan. Since Mo is a critic and critiques television shows, it is expected that her critiques/reviews would be critiqued by the readers. Readers have the right to disagree with Mo and critique her reviews, just like she critiques shows.

I disagree with not just the content of Mo's review, but also the words she purposely chose in writing her review. She's a smart woman, so it's not an accident that she chose the words she did, which, in my opinion, were accusatory and inflammatory words. I thought most of the responses by readers were well-thoughtout, calm and logical, especially considering the tone of Ms. Ryan's article.

My other problem with Mo's review is that it was, in my opinion, an unbalanced review. She criticized and tore apart Dean, yet excused or glossed over Sam's behavior and liability for the situation.

*Let me first qualify what I'm about to say because I'm not bringing these things up to start a Sam vs. Dean debate, but to show that BOTH brothers did things that should have been brought up for criticism and discussion in Mo's review.*

When Sam left at the end of 7.06, he didn't just leave for a few hours or days to cool off, he took off for 10 days and had no communication with Dean. Dean did the right thing by following Sam's wishes and did not contact Sam during this period. Dean understood that Sam was angry and needed time and Dean didn't stop him or chase after him. If not for accidentally meeting up in Lily Dale, would the brothers have communicated or gotten together anytime soon? We don't know, however, that would be Sam's call since he's the one that left and wanted time. It was up to Sam, when he was ready to talk, to contact Dean.

But, once they ran into each other and agreed to work together, Sam gives Dean the silent treatment, he doesn't want to work through things, and he doesn't seem to want to hear Dean's reasonings. Mo Ryan described Sam's behavior as "polite, but distant" but that's not what I saw, that's not what many, if not most, reviewers saw. Whether it be a teenager, a spouse or partner, the passive-agressive behavior Sam portrayed is not mature and is not "polite." Yet, again, Mo criticized only Dean.

Also, Mo called Dean's behavior as "emotional blackmail," but again, what about Sam's behavior? What about the "emotional blackmail" that Sam uses over Dean? There were a couple of wonderful and very well-thoughtout comments to Mo's review by a poster by the name of "EH" who spoke from her experience as an educator that Sam has a lot of power in the brother relationship and that he utilizes "emotional blackmail" (Sam's running away/leaving) a lot with Dean.

As I said above, the point of this post is not to criticize Sam (I only pointed out Sam's behavior here because Ms. Ryan has already pointed out Dean's behavior), but rather to show that I think Ms. Ryan could have (and should have) presented a more balanced critique of the episode had she critiqued all the characters and not just one.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Louisa 2011-11-10 11:40

Quoting Jordan:

There were a couple of wonderful and very well-thoughtout comments to Mo's review by a poster by the name of "EH" who spoke from her experience as an educator that Sam has a lot of power in the brother relationship and that he utilizes "emotional blackmail" (Sam's running away/leaving) a lot with Dean.

Those were very interesting comments from EH. I felt Mo totally disregarded the fact that Sam didn't contact Dean to let him know he was OK even though they both are apparently being targeted by leviathans, and Sam is apparently still having hallucinations (one of which involved waving a loaded gun at his brother). Are we really to believe Sam cares more about Dean killing a monster (because she wasn't a defenseless woman at all) he happened to have known briefly than he cares about Dean? After everything they've gone through?

It's such abysmal writing, like much of it has been so far this season. Dean's reaction was the right one, and fully justified imo.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Heather X 2011-11-10 09:57

Mo's not writing about SPN anymore. She flounced, OMG! She poses as a professional. I'm rolling on the floor laughing. Hurt me, hurt me Mo, don't write any more bad shallow reviews.

Sorry, Ms. Ryan is a professional none of the responses were personal. People disagreed with with her if she can't handle that she shouldn't be a critic. T

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Shelby 2011-11-10 10:00

You say that Mo became a fan in S4. I'm wondering if she's watched any of the previous seasons because for her to say that Dean was written OOC and that Sam was simply "politely distant" in this episode suggests to me that she might never have watched the earlier seasons. I thought most of the comments over there were well-written, intelligent disagreements with her review. I stopped reading her reviews some time ago. IA that there were only a few not so nice ones, but nothing compared to what I've seen at certain other places and sites.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# andy 2011-11-10 10:09

Thanks for bringing up something I also felt was a significant weakness in Mo's review, Jordan. Both brothers thought they were doing the right thing and both brothers made mistakes. Mo's portrayal of Dean as a heartless bastard who couldn't do anything right, her painting Sam as some wide eyed innocent victim who couldn't do anything wrong, and her fairly superficial assessment of the whole Amy situation in general just left me shaking my head. And what about the episode aside from just the brotherly bond issue? There was a whole lot going on here.

To me, this wasnt' a review- it was a full on rant. When a critic becomes that overly emotional to the point that it affects the quality of their reviews, maybe it is time to step back and reassess.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# jace 2011-11-10 11:11

I don't think the response was proportional at all to the fact that she was giving an opinion. I don't think she is obligated to give a pc review. She thought Dean was more wrong than Sam and she said so. The criticism was about the writing. She also criticized the writing for Sam.

I thought that the scene she was talking about was disproportionate to the emotional feel of the rest of the episode and I think Dean went too far in calling his brother a dick right then. (unpopular, I know but I never ran with the popular crowd :) ) Sam was distant and not laughing at Dean's jokes but I didn't think he was particularly dickish at that point. I thought Sam could have stood up more for himself because I think he had a right to be upset. It really shook him to find out that Dean has zippo trust in him and finding out from leviDean made it worse. The line about *Sam* nearly getting them both killed due to the hallucinations didn't sit well with me in particular seeing as the hell vision is so not Sam's fault.

I think these guy try to manipulate each other a lot. Sam is passive versus Dean's aggression. Dean rants and smacks his brother once in awhile; Sam leaves. I didn't get the reaction from some who were cheering Dean's hitting Sam in one episode than calling him names in another. How is that good behavior? And Sam should have been more sympathetic to his brother's worry. But both these guys are hurting and not coping well.

One of the weaknesses of the writing I feel is that we rarely get insight into Sam the way we do with Dean. You almost have to fill in more blanks to see Sam's point of view.

To my original point, fans who chose to read and comment on reviews take the risk of reading something they don't like and the ones that cross the line in replying are responsible for their own stupid behavior. I don't agree with the "she made me be mean to her" defense. I think saying that people were politely disagreeing with her in those threads is a stretch. Perhaps fans who can't treat others decently over a fictional character should also take a step back.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Gwalhaved 2011-11-10 11:15

If you want to be taken seriously, you have to be objective reviewers and you have not been. Everyone is entitled to their point of view, but when you can no longer respect the viewpoint of the other 2/3rds of the fandom (DGs, Bibros, Minions, etc.), you have to be called out on it. Also, based on Mo's last review, there is speculation that she wrote it without actually having watched the episode, which, if true, is shameful.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Louisa 2011-11-10 11:30

Quote:

…did anyone think that perhaps there’s a reason behind the frustration?

I suspect her frustration is more to do with the fact that she and a lot of other critics/bloggers have essentially been lied to by Gamble, who has been using them to bait Cas fans with hints at his possible return, and to peddle a completely bogus message about how the brothers will be united as one, and out on their own with no one to fall back on in Castiel's absence.

So far that has been proven to be a bunch of lies. Gamble is falling back on the default of contrived sibling rivalry to introduce tension, and Bobby has shown up every week to fulfill the deus ex machina role. Gamble's all-but confirmation that Misha Collins would be back has been overturned by Collins' own words to the effect that no one from the show has been in contact about this at all.

Mo Ryan has been one of the conduits for all that. I think that's likely where her frustration lies and that it was projected into this review.

I also can't help but wonder what your reaction would have been had Sam borne the brunt of such an inflammatory review. Let's not forget: one blogger who dared to criticize Sam during S6 received death threats from a certain group in fandom.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Sharon 2011-11-10 11:46

Lets not start Louise. All sides of the fandom including Deans have less than stellar moments. And Sam has been the subject of nasty articles than some Deans fans were more than happy to agree with.
And this has nothing to do with Castiel he was a secondary character whos story ended.
This whole thing is embrassing as it was when Eric defended Dean from being called a dick.
My suggestion to ANY reviewer is simply dont mention Dean esp in a less than stellar light that way you avoid any issues coming out of that review.It seems to me Mos issue is the writing rather than Dean and the way she feels the writers are presenting him . The chances are this might be her last review and I cant say I would blame her.There is one thing not liking what somebody says another when people attack that persons integrity to say it. Maybe she got over passionate but the response has been no less equally over the top.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Louisa 2011-11-10 14:05

Quote:

All sides of the fandom including Deans have less than stellar moments.

Yes. That was my point.

And while you may think Castiel's story ended, Mo Ryan has a right to be hacked off at how it ended, and so do I and a whole lot of other fans who've stopped watching if the lousy ratings are anything to go by.

It was Alice herself, in this article, who suggested Mo Ryan might have other reasons for feeling frustrated. Since she was a fan of Castiel, and has been used as a mouthpiece for Gamble's lies, I would suggest that might be one of those reasons. I'm not the only one to suggest it either.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Geordiegirl1967 2011-11-11 04:12

Quoting Louisa:

And while you may think Castiel's story ended, Mo Ryan has a right to be hacked off at how it ended, and so do I and a whole lot of other fans who've stopped watching if the lousy ratings are anything to go by.

Louisa you are entitled to your opinion about Cas, and I am not going to start a debate on that. But it is not valid to quote the ratings as if they provide positive proof that so many people agree with you about Cas (and have left because of it) that the ratings are 'lousy'.

Firstly the ratings are not lousy. Yes they are lower on Live + SD than last season. But the whole CW is way down, implying a wider problem with awareness and access that goes beyond what fans think of the show. You have to judge the ratings in relation to the rest of the shows on the network. Last Fridays ep was higher rated than any other CW show that has aired since. That is before TVD and TSC last night. Of course they will beat us. But we are fast approaching being the 3rd highest rated show on CW. And we aren't that far behind TSC.

Secondly you need to look at +7 DVR. This has gone up from an average of +40% last year to 50% to 60% this season. So a fair proportion of the fall in live + SD have just switched to DVRing (a growing trend generally but SPN is always one of the most DVRd shows). They haven't fallen out of love with the show or stopped watching.

And thirdly, the ratings provide no evidence that eps that feature Cas are more watched. For example, last year the 3rd Man (the first of s6 to feature Cas) had, by some margin, the lowest ratings of the 1st part of s6. I could quote lots of other examples.

As I say I am not trying to open up a debate on whether Cas is a good character, whether his story was over, how his departure was handled etc. I am simply commenting your statement that the ratings indicate huge numbers of fans voting with their feet in solidarity with you/him.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# alice 2011-11-11 10:28

I 100 percent back you there! I've said it many times myself, ratings are no indicator of dissatisfaction anymore. The CW itself is suffering ratings declines of 35%, while other networks (except CBS) are more like 10%. You should really see how bad NBC's woes are when football is taken away. CW fans do watch these shows, they just find other ways of watching them. That's why The CW has just scored lucrative deals with Netflix and Hulu. There is a demand for their shows in online streaming.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Geordiegirl1967 2011-11-10 12:23

I thought Mo's review was very poorly judged. She is paid to be a critic. She is not, like Alice, someone who, out of love for the show, spends her own time running websites, reviewing episodes, promoting the show to others, refereeing arguments between posters etc. This is her job. It requires some professional detachment and objectivity. That doesn't mean she can't be critical, but emotional ranting has no place in professional reviewing.

We hear hints from Alice, and from her, that there are more reasons for her outburst than we know. I suspect the absence of Cas may have a lot to do with that. I remember her praising to the heavens my least favourite episode of SPN ever; Free to be You and Me which was basically a pilot for a whole new show called Dean and Cas.

I agree with Alice that sometimes people are incredibly insensitive when hiding behind the anonymity of the internet. But Mo has been around long enough to know what to expect if you put this kind of inflammatory material out there. I am not excusing cruelty, but as a journalist I would have expected her to have developed a thicker skin.

If it is true that she won't write about SPN any more then I won't lose any sleep over it. She only became a fan of the show in s4 which goes a long way to explaining why I hardly ever agree with her take on things. If that was her favourite season then she clearly watches for other reasons than I do. But that is not why I won’t miss her. I would rather she say nothing than use her considerable reach to spread her own negative spin on the show to all corners of the internet. I support the show. I still love it. There are only 2 purposes to be served by her alleged tough love 'I am only saying this for the good of the show' articles;
1) if she genuinely spoke for the majority of the fandom on what was wrong and what needs to change - which the responses to her article, and from other critics clearly show she doesn't, and
2) if the showmakers are actually influenced by her - which I am certain they aren't.

If those 2 things are not true ie she isn’t representative and she (thankfully given that her views are not those of the majority of fans) isn’t influencing the writers, then all her articles are doing is damaging the show, stirring up discontent and getting everyone worked up over nothing.

I have often found myself asking, when faced with hugely negative posts about the show on various forums, ‘why are you still wasting your time moaning about a show you no longer like?’. That applies just as much to critics as to fans. I have nothing personally against Mo, and I am sorry if she is upset, but if she has fallen out of love with the show I would rather she moved on.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Louisa 2011-11-10 14:08

Quote:

if she has fallen out of love with the show I would rather she moved on.

Because God forbid that anyone should point out the many issues, not least of which are the dire writing and non-existant continuity, that the show has under Gamble.
(Edited by Alice. BIG rule here. You don't insult other commenters.)

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Geordiegirl1967 2011-11-10 16:48

Louisa you misunderstand me. I'm not arguing for no criticism whatsoever. There have been things done in the show that I have really hated, and have spoken out about (cough....s4.....cough.....soulless Sam...cough). But I never stopped loving the show. The world is full of people who either dont watch or dont like SPN. So negative opinions will always be available. I prefer criticism widely read within the fandom to be from people who are generally fans. I think Mo has, pretty much by her own admission, crossed over into the territory of no longer being a fan. As I said, as someone who loves the show, I would prefer that a widely read critic does not use the influence that gives her to rubbish my favourite show to all who will listen

And can I politely point out that it is only your opinion that there is 'dire writing' etc in the show. Many people would disagree with you. Many certainly disagree with Mo, as a glance down the responses to her article will quickly confirm. Maybe you wouldn't be defending Mo so strongly if she wasn't in line with your view?

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# cd28 2011-11-10 22:22

You might prefer that the only people who write about Supernatural love the show, but doesn't that defeat the pupose of criticism if critics can only be people who love the show?

I hear SPN fans complain a lot about the lack of attention the show gets. Mo was giving the show free publicity by getting it a mention in AOL. Mo may have been critical at times, but the saying "There's no such thing as bad publicity" comes to mind. Would you rather the show be ignored? SPN fans really are their own worst enemy.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Geordiegirl1967 2011-11-11 03:31

Quoting cd28:

You might prefer that the only people who write about Supernatural love the show, but doesn't that defeat the pupose of criticism if critics can only be people who love the show?

No, because as I said, I am not against criticism, but I think it should come from people who basically 'get' and enjoy the show. So it would then be relative criticism from a baseline of being a fan ie saying why you like certain eps better than others, or certain arcs / seasons / characters etc.

Quote:

I hear SPN fans complain a lot about the lack of attention the show gets. Mo was giving the show free publicity by getting it a mention in AOL. Mo may have been critical at times, but the saying "There's no such thing as bad publicity" comes to mind. Would you rather the show be ignored? SPN fans really are their own worst enemy.

Yes I would rather a critic who doesn't like the show and is never going to say anything positive about it didn't comment on it at all. I don't think the 'no such thing as bad publicity..' argument applies. How can a wide audience reading every week about what a terrible show SPN is be in any way a positive thing? And while Mo has been 'critical at times' up until recently, she was clearly coming over as a fan of the show and I had no problem with that. That was good for us I am sure. What I am saying is that if Mo has gone from being a fan, albeit a hard to please one, to no longer supporting the show I would prefer she moved on and stopped covering it. The alternative is a weekly hatchet job, and how can that be a good thing - for her or the show?

AOL should just give the job to Laura Prudolm. She often covers SPN and she loves it.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# cd28 2011-11-11 08:44

I don't think it's a critic's job to support a show. It's a critic's job to look at it objectively and criticize it when it deserves it. Mo is writing for more than SPN fans. She's writing for people who want an honest assessment of a variety of shows so they can choose accordingly. And yes, I agree with a lot of her points.

Would you want a food critic to only cover restaurants that they know they love? The restaurant owners would love it, but it wouldn't help warn you off bad restaurants. How about as an alternative solution, fans who don't want to read criticism of their show avoid reading critical reviews and instead stick to fan support websites?

And I still say critical coverage is better than being ignored. It's not going to drive away faithful fans, but it puts the show in the minds of people who don't normally watch. Something in it might pique their interest and they may tune in despite the review.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# cd28 2011-11-10 12:51

I'm reading these posts and thinking the disconnect lies in that Mo thought she was criticizing the writing choices for a fictional character during a certain period of time. A lot of these responses sound like they're coming from people defending their best friend.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# gigi 2011-11-10 14:04

Quoting cd28:

A lot of these responses sound like they're coming from people defending their best friend.

It's called "fandom". That's what invested fans sound like (and these were pretty polite ones at that.)

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Kat 2011-11-11 00:22

I don't think most fans begrudge a reviewer’s personal opinion of Supernatural. That's what reviews are: personal evaluations of the episode based on the critic's knowledge of the inner workings of the industry. However, there is a level of professionalism one expects from a critic of Maureen Ryan's station and years in the business. I thought her "Tough Love for Supernatural" was very well done. But singling out and attacking a very popular character - whether it be Sam or Dean - isn't good. Mo is more than welcome to vent her spleen in private, but her professional critiques should be well thought out and supported, especially considering this fan base. The backlash would have been equally as vehement if she'd called Sam a "dick."

I didn't read all the comments regarding Mo's review, but the majority I saw were thoughtful, thorough and well written. Mo's decision to continue writing SPN reviews should be based on whether she feels the writing, story lines, directing, pacing and overall production of Supernatural is worth her time, not on whether her feelings got hurt because there was a backlash against a pretty non-professional review.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Geordiegirl1967 2011-11-11 03:33

I totally agree Kat.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Sylvie 2011-11-11 08:22

I agree with you on this as well. The woman is a professional after all. If she does make the decision to quit writing SPN reviews, it will not be because her "feelings" got hurt.

Pauline Kael wrote quite a few nasty film reviews in her own time that not everyone agreed with, and she was one of the most respected film critics. So just saying, in that profession you need to have thick skin. There will always be people that disagree vociferously. You take it, you leave it, and then you move on to the next.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# cd28 2011-11-11 10:06

I'd be willing to bet that Mo has a much thicker skin than most people here are assuming, but SPN fandom often comes across as a mob of 15-year-old fangirls. If covering SPN isn't something that's expected in her job, because it's not considered a top show in the industry, why shouldn't she drop it after a reaction like this? Personally I think it's a loss for the show, and I enjoy reading well thought out critiques of shows I watch (it doesn't stop me from watching the show), so it's a loss for me as a reader too.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Kat 2011-11-11 23:26

I totally agree with this! She's a critic, after all. This is her chosen profession. Why would her skin be so thin as to get all weepy because people didn't agree with her? She tossed off a review without considering the advisibility of her wording. It was mistake. Own it and move on. For myself, I'd have been just as offended if she'd called Sam a dick. It just isn't necessary nor professional.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# cd28 2011-11-11 08:49

I think the point is that fans see it as attacking Dean whereas a critic sees it as attacking the writing of a character. They're looking at it analytically, and not seeing the character as a person. She wasn't happy with the writing of Sam either.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# alice 2011-11-11 10:25

I can assure, any decision she makes to stop writing about Supernatural won't be because of fan backlash. It's because to her, the quality of the show has so declined that it's not worthy of weekly analysis anymore. She feels like she's getting repetitive in her criticisms.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

# Kat 2011-11-13 14:40

I'm hoping Sera and the Supernatural writers can get it together. I've been watching since the beginning and to see it become co cliche has been difficult. Sam and Dean are repeating themselves, and though I think J2 are trying to infuse something new into their performances, the overall stories have become a bit trite and the guys' connection to the main arc is non-existent, at least at this time. I mean, why in the world would the Leviathans be after them anyway? There's been no foundation laid to support this arc of the story. If the Levi's so powerful Crowley doesn't scare them, why marshal a concentrated force to go after Sam and Dean? Anyway, I hope the show gets it together and SPN goes out with a bang.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

Refresh comments list
RSS feed for comments to this post

Add comment

JComments

The Winchester Family Business

News Categories

Login

WFB Members Online