Is it pointless to review indvidual TV show episodes?

I have a few sources for checking games, and one of the sites I check review a large number of things. I happened to click on one of their TV show reviews, which I never do, and I noticed on the top it is says in bold "Note: Full spoilers for the episode follow.". I then checked out a few other show reviews on the site to compare and noticed that they all start with the same warning.

This seems to be completely pointless to me. Why would anyone want to read a review of a show they are thinking about watching, if the review spoils the story for them? Would these same people read a review that spoils the story of a movie or a game too?Am I missing something here?

On the same topic, why do people even bother reviewing individual episodes of TV shows at all? Is it just purely for the hits? There is no additional charge to watch each episode individually unless you are using a VOD service, but really, if you were watching a TV show, would you skip episodes, and potentially miss key scenes, because they don't score well?

I like reading/watching spoiler reviews after consuming whatever they are reviewing just to hear their thoughts on it. Half in the Bag being the main example, but I do really like that before they get into spoilers they tell you if it's good or not up front.

Yeah, I get that. I think the problem with a lot of sites, though, is that the entire review is stuffed with spoilers, so you can either read it, fully aware that any surprises are going to be spoiled before you watch the thing or you can use it, like you do, to compare to your own opinions of the episodes after you have seen it. But, surely in that case it would be better to label it as something other than a review, right?

I think it still counts as a review, it's just filled with spoilers. TV reviews are weird. If you're not even watching a show, why read a review of an episode in the middle of a season, or of a season finale if you don't want spoilers.

Read the review for the pilot or season debut and just watch the show if it sounds interesting.

I think it depends on the show. For example, lots of people hate on the later seasons of The Simpsons but there are bound to be a few good episodes mixed in there, so you need reviews to pick them out. You aren't watching The Simpsons for the plot, so spoilers don't matter; it's about the humour.

I don't think spoilers necessarily ruin a piece of media though; it's about the journey, not the destination. A review for a drama may mention an important event, but what makes it an important event is how the characters reach that point and how they respond afterwards. Knowing what the event is does not change that.

That's basically my whole point in a nutshell. Also, if you are watching a TV show, you are probably going to watch every episode regardless of the score it gets, which kind of makes review a wee bit pointless; the only people who are going to read a review of episode 18 of xxxxx, are the kind of people who will watch it anyway. There is very little financial cost involved with watching individual episodes of TV shows, so it's unlikely people who are fans are going to skip episodes. I do think a spoiler-free review of a whole season is worth it, but individual episodes? Not so much.

I agree with you it depends on the shows, for example, most animated shows usually produce very self-contained episodes, so skipping a particularly bad episode won't spoil your overall enjoyment, but shows that contain deep multi-season story-lines are best enjoyed without going into the show knowing which direction the show is going. Also, if there are many possible outcomes to the event, wouldn't it spoil it for you if you knew which one was going to be chosen before you even watched the episode?

I feel like a lot of the TV coverage I've seen isn't really about reviewing the product, it's more like trying to start interesting conversations about popular shows. At least that's the only reason I can think of why someone would review a particular episode of Game of Thrones or Breaking Bad or whatever. TV is something people like to talk about. Some people even watch bad TV just to be able to join the conversation.

I think its different for premieres and stuff though. I can see the value in reviews for those, but it's just as weird in its own way because its like reviewing a book based on the first chapter.

Yeah. I hate to use this analogy, but I can't think of anything better right now: it's the whole watercooler thing.

I look at TV reviews when no one I usually talk to is watching a certain show, but I still want to "talk" about it. Reading a few thoughts about it from other folks is close enough, and if I really want to say my piece I'd create an account to comment there, or just make/post in a thread here.

They're still technically reviews, but their value is more geared towards discussion rather than whether or not you should watch a certain episode.

It's fun to read a discussion or maybe they'll point out something I missed.

Problem is if I look at the number rating beforehand, it'll color my perception of the episode beforehand. "10?? But that was only like a 9.5!" Leading to unwarranted disappointmemt (or pleasant surprises).

It's pretty much this.

I don't often read these types of reviews myself, but I also generally do not read reviews on games. Sometimes I'm interested how an episode of South Park was received for instance, so I might check them out then. But I generally do not use reviews as purchasing advice. It's something that you can completely disagree with and doesn't necessarily have to be noticeable just by reading it. It is why Quick Looks are the best. They are better than any review.

Reviews on progressives is sort of useless from a "this episode was good this one was bad" perspective. However, as has already been said, discussion of a series as it progresses can be interesting. LOST is a good example of this.

The traditional review would make more sense for either long-running progressives like say, Supernatural or X-Files, where a new viewer is not necessarily best served starting at the pilot, and the meta story is sometimes not addressed at all in some episodes that can be effectively used as an introduction. Or, as was said before, anything where there is no meta-story, like a sitcom, where being able to learn the best season or best episodes becomes valuable.

The inverse of that would be a review system that can be used to create a 'skip list', where a set of episodes are deemed a combination of poor/unnecessary and can be safely skipped without diminishing the series' experience. I believe Danielle Riendeau has one of those floating around for FarScape.

So short answer; I think any good review is valuable. TV show episodes are no exception. The key is they need to be written in such a way as to help both fans and newcomers to their respective series.

Like others have pointed out, TV show reviews are a place to go talk/read about what others think about an episode. I used to do this with Game of Thrones back before any of my friends were into the show. I wanted somewhere I could go to see other peoples reactions. I think it would be better to call them "discussions" instead of reviews or something.

Otherwise, reviews of individual episodes are pointless. If someone needs somebody to tell them how they should spend 30 minutes to an hour of their life, there's something wrong.

It depends on the show for me. Some are more serialized and connected than others.

Anyways, yes the progression and discussion are useful. I think it's also kind of interesting to look back and see what people were thinking as they went along. Shows that I get to after they are done, sometimes I go back and read reviews or writing during their run and find that interesting to look at.

It's hard that's for sure. Reviewing each episode makes sense in some cases and doesn't in others. Sitcoms and comedies don't really have much to go on for a full on review. Shows like Community sometimes offer enough strange twists in turns (partially because of behind the scenes happenings) that you could talk about enough to write a few paragraphs.

Shows like Breaking Bad or The Walking Dead are long enough and intricate enough that you can write about them. Enough people love to talk about those kind of shows in particular, think water cooler shows, that they will read up on reviews to see what other's thought about them.

@br4dl3i9h said:

Actually, review is the perfect word for these kinds of articles. I think you're getting hung up on a very specific purpose that reviews can serve, namely to provide advice before purchase or consumption. But people review things for other reasons than that. They review one-off concerts and plays to reflect on and share their experience, even though others can't go out and have that same experience.

To me, reviews have intrinsic value. They stimulate people to go beyond merely consuming media, to consider meaning and themes, and to discuss their thoughts and feelings with others.

Who cares as long as I can still keep going with my blog that reviews every episode of Pointless.