Tangents in reviews cut for going too long and not really being relevant

Do you ever get part way through writing a review and realise you got distracted, included a small tangent that you realised stopped being relevant it went on so long so you ended up taking it out.

Sometimes you still want to say those things but it isn’t really relevant to the review, and you also don’t want to make a new forum post for just that because it’s not super substantive.

Anyway, I’m interested in if anyone else has one of these and wanted to share

I am new to reviewing so I only have one from when I was reviewing Love and Monsters, apparently I had more to say about the fandom’s opinion of the story than I thought, it was taking me too long to start talking about the actual episode for my liking, and the whole section didn’t really have a point, so I took it out of the review, but I still wanted to say it, hence this. This is what I wrote

I’ve heard it said that the reason Love and Monsters was so thoroughly hated and so widely considered “the worst story ever” as recently as a few years ago, because we were so spoiled for quality episodes in the first two seasons and Love and Monsters was the first considered to be truly bad. Do I agree with this? Difficult to say, primarily because I was so young when it first aired, and partly because I don’t think Love and Monsters is the first bad episode, but also because I don’t even really think its a real explanation, especially not an explanation for why this was an incredibly common opinion for over a decade.
I find the legacy of Love and Monsters fascinating, especially as it seems to have recently entered into a bit of a reappraisal by the fandom at large, perhaps not a reversal to widely loved, but liking Love and Monsters certainly isn’t as controversial an opinion as it used to be, and I think it is now considered to be overrated by a large group of people
Love and Monsters occupies this very interesting space in the fandom where it has been so thoroughly hated for so long that the fact it has been reappraised is very noticeable in a way I can’t compare to any other episode. And as a Love and Monster enjoyer I hope this reappraisal continues, and I think it’ll be fascinating to see what the fandom stance on this story is in another decade.


Love & Monsters suffers from a bad rep for two reasons - the badly judged ‘joke’ at the end tends to dominate any reviews of the story; and I think a lot of fans didn’t quite get that Victor is basically a parody of ‘superfans’ who take all the joy out of fandom (or did get that, and took offence).

I think it’s a great story.

As for tangents in reviews - I think it’s fine - after all, it’s your review so it’s up to you what path it takes.


I need to rewatch Love and Monsters one of these days–I do think people only say it’s bad because they think the main villain is weird, which to me is not reason enough to say an episode is bad.


It’s been a while, but for me, Love & Monsters is not bad.
It’s not good either.
It’s completely ‘Meh’ to ‘Fine’.

The story is fine with nothing spectacularly good or bad, while the acting is hit-and-miss. The ending joke is rather silly, but I do like a dirty BJ joke. Peter Kay is the worst part of this episode for me, but I do have a natural aversion to him.

As for reviews, I just keep mine short and sweet, with an overview in maybe 100 words, so tangents aren’t my thing.


Honestly for me people going off on a Tangent is the best part of reviews :grin:


When writing reviews I try to stay on topic as much as possible. Maybe I’m even a little too afraid of veering off topic when trying to make a point.

1 Like

Yes and no.

The majority of my reviews end up going into tangents, but that’s always been a part of their charm. It was a running joke - back when I was uploading them on the other site that shall not be named - that any time I discussed David Darlington’s music I would find some way to compare it with Command & Conquer soundtracks.

I honestly prefer it when those odd tangents are in reviews because it gives a bigger insight into the reviewer’s own perspective. It also makes it feel like the review is being written by an actual person, not just a paid professional like WatchMojo or BuzzFeed might hire.

1 Like

I think the first part of Love and Monster is brilliant. If it were up to me I would just have 45 min of the Lovely Linda group and their meetings. Maybe also keep the part with Jackie but that is mainly because the more Jackie the better.

I want more cute nonsense in Who. My biggest fear with the next season is that there won’t be enough breeding room.

Okay off topic but just wanted to give my thoughts on LnM.


I always liked Love & Monsters, and I think the hate the monster got was a bit unfair considering it was a Blue Peter competition and designed by a child. It’s silly and ridiculous, that’s what DW does best.
The exploration of wider in-universe groups and the impact the Doctor can have on random humans without even realising was really cool.
And I simply can’t hate anything that introduced little me to ELO.

I want to do a proper review of all nuwho eps eventually, and I know for sure I’ll go on many a tangent when I do :sweat_smile:


I watched it again today.
Perhaps it was not the best call for a show that sometimes has a tough job of being taken seriously to let a child be in charge of monster design. It is kind of a gateway to a bit of ridicule.

There is one thing that annoys me about the monster that in itself is a tangent - Rose asks The Doctor if it is a Raxacoricofallapatorian, but it looks absolutely nothing like one - RTD don’t “gaslight” me into thinking this looks anything like a Raxacoricofallapatorian because I have got the use of my eyes :wink:


I do love the line about Clom though!

1 Like