Started By
Message

re: Agents of Shield Thread

Posted on 5/14/14 at 1:01 pm to
Posted by Dr RC
The Money Pit
Member since Aug 2011
58164 posts
Posted on 5/14/14 at 1:01 pm to
true.

and while there is an argument to be made that they could have done a better job early on, its not like it was ever as bad as some vocal critics made it out to be.

hell, I think season one of AOS was pretty much equal to Arrow (the first half of that show was basically a soap) and look how bad arse that show became in season 2.
Posted by BrightsideTiger412
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2008
1710 posts
Posted on 5/14/14 at 1:22 pm to
Most new shows not on HBO or FX follow a pretty simple guideline.


Introduce Characters
Introduce Problem
Characters fix problem

Rinse and repeat. They don't build on anything and people lose interest fast.

Agents of Shield, kind of started out that way. Arrow kind of started out that way. But if you keep the audience watching for more than 4-6 episodes, you can build on the story. They finally gave us a villain for more than 1 episode. Marvel/ABC did a really good job of saving the show.
Posted by Bamatab
Member since Jan 2013
15112 posts
Posted on 5/14/14 at 1:24 pm to
quote:

hell, I think season one of AOS was pretty much equal to Arrow (the first half of that show was basically a soap) and look how bad arse that show became in season 2.

The problem with the 1st half season of AoS was that it lacked direction, other than Coulson basically babysitting a bunch of newbies. Arrow had direction from the first episode of season one (redeeming his dad's list). I mean the guy was basically going on a killing spree the first half of season 1.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram