Featuring Matt Anderson and Ben De Bono
In this news episode we discuss recent film remakes, and other movie and TV news.
Donate to help the Water Fund here: https://www.onedayswages.org/thescifichristian
Standard Podcast
April 17, 2024
Recent Comments
- Arie - Episode 1135: The Criterion Challenge: Ordet
- Arie - Episode 1111: Iliad Introduction
September 11, 2023
- Arie - Episode 1100: The Sci-Fi Christian Undectennial Self-Celebration Extravaganza
July 12, 2023
- Arie - Episode 1074: The Joy of Work
December 10, 2022
- Nan - Episode 962: Burial vs. Cremation
August 23, 2021
OK, a 2 part question for episode 500 for both of y’all:
1) name 2-3 sf works (any media) that are currently considered classics that you feel confident will still be considered classics in 100 years. Explain.
2) name 2-3 sf works too recent to be considered classics yet that will be
considered classic in 100 years also. Defend your choices.
Thanks again guys!
Great question about the Classics, Christopher. I think we covered some of this in “Episode 442: Staying Classy with the Classics”: http://thescifichristian.com/2016/02/episode-442-staying-classy-with-the-classics/
Let me know, and if not, Ben and I can try to give a few more answers.
Obviously, I need to listen and remember better. 🙂
How about this instead: Are fractional ratings really useful in a 5 star rating system? If the system starts at one star, half stars give us nine possible ratings for any given work. Do we really need that level of granularity? Terrible, poor, mediocre, good and excellent aren’t enough for us? Do we really need a 3 and a half star rating for “almost good?” Do we need a 2 and a half star rating for “almost mediocre?” It strikes me as unnecessary hair-splitting, and I think half-stars often are a way for the reviewer to say “I wish this work fit into the next higher category, but it doesn’t. ” Hence the tendency of the last 4 Star Wars films to get 2.5 and 3.5 star reviews.
Am I missing something here? What say you gentlemen?