TubaJon Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 (edited) Phantom Regiment. Every year. I just don't get it. So AShy ^This! although there is merrit to why people are saying some shows are overrated. In all honesty, I have never seen a group in any activity, that is so loved, while at the same time, so dissapointing(for lack of a better word(like really, I cant think of better word than dissapointing, but dissapointing is not what i mean, and its hurting my brain)) to their fans. I am not saying that this is the case for me personally, but in general, it seems that most people like Phantom as a corps, yet someohow at the same time, tend to either not like their shows, or believe them to be underachieved. Edited May 12, 2011 by TubaJon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelloHorn13 Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Haven't read through the pages, but here Are my picks for the most overrated shows of the last decade: 2003 SCV 2004 Cadets 2005 Cavaliers (as much as I love it this show) 2006 Cavaliers 2007 Blue Stars 2007 Academy 2007 Blue Devils 2007 Cadets 2008 Blue Devils 2009 Cavaliers 2010 Carolina Crown (had to do it) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luvs me sum mello! Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 what possible pleasure could anybody get out of briniging this thread back? it's beyond my poor little brain. For the lulz, of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
contrajedi8 Posted May 12, 2011 Author Share Posted May 12, 2011 (edited) ^This! although there is merrit to why people are saying some shows are overrated. In all honesty, I have never seen a group in any activity, that is so loved, while at the same time, so dissapointing(for lack of a better word(like really, I cant think of better word than dissapointing, but dissapointing is not what i mean, and its hurting my brain)) to their fans. I am not saying that this is the case for me personally, but in general, it seems that most people like Phantom as a corps, yet someohow at the same time, tend to either not like their shows, or believe them to be underachieved. Phantom Regiment: the Chicago Cubs of drum corps. Edited May 12, 2011 by contrajedi8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luvs me sum mello! Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 SCV every year this last decade. They're like the little brother desperately trying to get attention in the shadow of Big Brother BD that every show is always ubber hyped as "the year they're going to take it all again." *****Disclaimer****** This does not mean I hate your corps, SCV fans. So chill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemesiscorps Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 So someone please tell me what the difference between a show being over-hyped and a show being incredibly well received (ie enjoyed immensely) because I would love to know what the difference is. Let me take on Madison 2010.....the corps puts together a top notch staff....picks and designs (better than recent seasons) a show that is meant to engage and excite the crowd...and performs at a higher level than it had been doing for several seasons. The fact that fans loved the show and were happy to see Madison present a much better product and execute at a higher level is over-hype ? Okay, I'll try. I think the difference between a show being overhyped and a show being incredibly well received is not too difficult to conclude, but it does require a person to be objective about it. It seems to me that show overhype is typically associated with statements/sentiments like: "the greatest ________ ever"; "the most _______ of all time"; "unbelievable"; etc. In other words, people tend to speak in opinion-based absolutes that have no real measurable foundation for comparison, and they hold on to those statements, even when new information reveals obvious inaccuracies about the statements. A show being incredibly well received often (but not always) elicits an involuntary, unexpected, or sometimes spontaneous emotional or intellectually stimulated reaction from a spectator, be they objective or not. Often, the impact or memory of the response can last for a considerable period of time, but the context of the viewed experience becomes an important factor as time passes on, and the show is viewed repeatedly, absent the emotions or live performance factors originally associated. Here's a bad example, but the point should be clear: An NFL play that was thought to be the greatest play ever when viewed live, but throw in instant replay... "upon further review..." we find that the guy never had possession of the ball, his foot was out of bounds, or any other factors that revealed things (perhaps flaws) that our emotions or the speed of play masked in real time. We still appreciate the effort and the sport of it all, but objectively, we're willing to let it go because it wasn't quite what we perceived, but it was a great game nonetheless, and thus well received. Overhype would be continuing to claim the play to be "the greatest blah, blah, blah ever," and sticking to that conclusion, regardless of what's known after closer examination. To me, the most overrated shows of the decade are those that don't garner lasting "hype" or support from across the spectrum of most objective drum corps fans... if there is such a thing... as being as "awesome" as the homers contend the show to be. And if there was a genuine, foolproof way of actually measuring all of this, then we wouldn't need paid judges to decide. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Other Mike Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Okay, I'll try. I think the difference between a show being overhyped and a show being incredibly well received is not too difficult to conclude, but it does require a person to be objective about it. It seems to me that show overhype is typically associated with statements/sentiments like: "the greatest ________ ever"; "the most _______ of all time"; "unbelievable"; etc. In other words, people tend to speak in opinion-based absolutes that have no real measurable foundation for comparison, and they hold on to those statements, even when new information reveals obvious inaccuracies about the statements. A show being incredibly well received often (but not always) elicits an involuntary, unexpected, or sometimes spontaneous emotional or intellectually stimulated reaction from a spectator, be they objective or not. Often, the impact or memory of the response can last for a considerable period of time, but the context of the viewed experience becomes an important factor as time passes on, and the show is viewed repeatedly, absent the emotions or live performance factors originally associated. Here's a bad example, but the point should be clear: An NFL play that was thought to be the greatest play ever when viewed live, but throw in instant replay... "upon further review..." we find that the guy never had possession of the ball, his foot was out of bounds, or any other factors that revealed things (perhaps flaws) that our emotions or the speed of play masked in real time. We still appreciate the effort and the sport of it all, but objectively, we're willing to let it go because it wasn't quite what we perceived, but it was a great game nonetheless, and thus well received. Overhype would be continuing to claim the play to be "the greatest blah, blah, blah ever," and sticking to that conclusion, regardless of what's known after closer examination. To me, the most overrated shows of the decade are those that don't garner lasting "hype" or support from across the spectrum of most objective drum corps fans... if there is such a thing... as being as "awesome" as the homers contend the show to be. And if there was a genuine, foolproof way of actually measuring all of this, then we wouldn't need paid judges to decide. What an excellent post ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Phantom Regiment: the Chicago Cubs of drum corps. Phantom Regiment last won a Championship Title in 2008, not quite 3 years ago. The Chicago Cubs last won a Championship Title in 1908, not quite 103 years ago. I'd say there's at least SOME difference here. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 heroes i just didn't get how people ever got into that show. a guy can stop bullets in mid-air, but he can't stop a little guy with a samurai sword from stabbing him all the way through the abdomen. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 (edited) Okay, I'll try. I think the difference between a show being overhyped and a show being incredibly well received is not too difficult to conclude, but it does require a person to be objective about it. And if there was a genuine, foolproof way of actually measuring all of this, then we wouldn't need paid judges to decide. Well said. Although this thread asks us the most " overrated " shows of the past decade, in my opinion the most overrated show of all time has to be the Star of Indiana of 1993. Don't get me wrong, it was a good show, well executed to be sure. But the show has taken on almost mythic proposition of late it seems. You mention about the " need of paid judges to decide " this stuff. They did too in 1993. 2 completely different sets of judging panels of judges as a matter of fact. And both back to back panels agreed too. ( Semi's and Finals ) Star was very very good... maybe great even. But they wern't the best Corps at Championships in 1993. But today there is the tendency to embellish the past. But like you said, we have " the paid judges to decide " such stuff, despite the hyperbole and revisionist history attempt on the part of some perhaps. Since we are discussing the most overrated shows of the last decade, this question perhaps need to be clarified as to whether we are asking overrated by fans... or overrated by the judges. I'd have different shows and Corps depending upon if we are asking overrated by judges... or overrated by fans. On the other side of this, we also could ask who we think are the most underrated Corps of the last decade. Here again, we'd need to clarify if we were asking for our opinion of the most underrated Corps with the judges... or with the fans. We just might get a different set of shows and Corps depending upon if we are talking about judges... or the fans. Edited May 12, 2011 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.