Of course review bombing can happen,but enough to lower it to 43 percent score? Where is your evidence that is what happened?
Yes absolutely possible.
There was a huge wave of negativity for the show before it ever came out, an inordinate amount of discourse about how the show was terrible based on simply its premise.
SNW was welcomed with open arms, it was a show that was wanted from the start so nobody started any kind of campaign against it. Does having a straight white man as the lead make a difference? Maybe. I wouldn't say it generates a positive score but it keeps away people who would unduly apply a negative one.
Venerable older shows are typically immune to this, once they reach a classic status people tend not to judge them by today's standards. They also can't campaign for the cancellation of a show that ended decades ago so there's no motivation in it for them.
Your point still has more holes than the titanic but what do you want to get out of it? What is in it for you to tell a group of people who mostly all like a show that that show is bad?
No its not.
Which I'm glad to see is finally being acknowledged here. The premise for the show wasn't interesting and people made their feelings known. There's nothing wrong with that. The fact that so many voiced their displeasure should have been a red flag to the producers.
And the other side doesn't try and define what Star Trek is either?
Give the fans what they want and they will be happy? Imagine that. But if the show had sucked those numbers would not be sitting where they are now after three seasons.
B.S. If someone hates shows strickly for those reasons , they wouldn't hold back from old shows. If Legacy had been the next show , you know, the proposed female character led show in the new Enterprise that many REALLY wanted to see, the backlash would have been almost non existent. But instead they get an Academy show which would have been a tough sell no matter what race or gender was the lead.
What kind of question is that? This is a forum, not an echo chamber. The title of the thread is reviews and I posted numbers having to deal with reviews. If you don't like seeing constructive criticism then stay off the internet.
Yes it is.
It shows that a small portion of hardcore Star Trek fans like the show, unless you believe the majority of the fans are still posting on a bbs and not on social media.
This is something Paramount has been hoping for since they bought Desilu in 1968. Hardly a novel thought.
One you avoided answering. Very telling.
Telling people a show is bad with shoddy evidence is not constructive criticism. I don't know what you think that means.
I did answer your question. There is no motive . Im simply discussing reviews which for some reason got your knickers all in a twist and start claiming "conspiracy." A very typical tactic for someone living in a bubble
You aren't discussing though, you're making declarations and shutting down any kind of rebuttal with laughing faces and the insistences that everyone else is wrong. That can't lead to a conversation.
Your rebuttal have been ridiculous (dismissing websites with huge audience just because the numbers arent going your way) hence the emoji. Turning the conversation into me and why Im posting reviews in a review thread is beyond ridiculous. Its clear you can't handle criticism of this show and conjuring up conspiracies to explain it all away looks pathetic.
The same reason for why you can't cite wikipedia as an academic source.
I look forward to the day you actually watch the show yourself with an open mind and form your own opinions. On that day I will enjoy comparing and contrasting with you.
