Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Here's a representative quote: "I am deeply sorry to be severely disappointed by the styling of the C8. I hoped for something really new and exciting, not a boringly generic supercar, mostly indistinguishable from the many and varied unimaginative devices that show up regularly at the Geneva auto show."

The stuff beyond this, I somewhat agree. I like some of the lines on the C8, but some of the stuff on both the front grille surfaces and the rear end seem busier than they need to be.

However, I would never expect a mid-engine Vette to look anything other than like a "boringly generic" mid-engine supercar. All the lines of a "generic boring" mid-engine supercar are driven by the human form, geometry, physics, and aerodynamics. 

We're a long way beyond car designers being able to design nearly anything about a car beyond trim work. Back in the 1960's, you could make a car look unique. We had wind tunnels but we didn't have advanced computer design methods. We didn't even really understand downforce much--there are reports of some sports cars having tendency to "lift" at high speed instead. 

Now, cars are designed in computers and wind tunnels to achieve drag numbers [and for sports cars, downforce numbers], and basic geometry and aerodynamics give you very little wiggle room. So cars all look identical except for the trim. 

So some cars try to stand out with angular lines [Corvette, recent Acura designs]. Some are more clean, flowing designs [Ferrari, MacLaren]. Others try to stand out with distinctive styling cues [the gaping maw of a front grill that you guys all hate on the Lexus, but oddly I really like]. 

But all sedans look basically the same. Same shape. All crossovers look basically the same. Same shape. And all mid-engine supercars look basically the same. Same shape. Because they're all being designed based on the same constraints of the human form, geometry, physics, and aerodynamics.

Agreed. Old quote that I first heard in relation to motorcycles but applies equally to cars: "It's a lot more fun to ride a slow bike fast than it is to ride a fast bike slow."

Again, I go back to the Ariel Atom. It's nothing in comparison to a modern supercar. It doesn't have launch control. It doesn't have a flappy paddle dual clutch gearbox (in fact, I think it ONLY comes in 6spd manual). It doesn't have ABS. I think they tried to give it downforce, but with a tubular steel half-open frame and exposed front wheels, I'll bet the coefficient of drag is dreadful, so top speed is probably not very high. I'm sure the "numbers" are probably far worse than even the base model C8 Vette.

And I'll bet it's impossible to drive without a smile...

...not that you can see it behind the full-face helmet you probably should wear while driving it since there's no windscreen.

That's why the original Mazda Miata was such a hit.  It was everything you ever wanted in an affordable British sports car, plus it had reliability, an electrical system that worked, outstanding quality control, and a great nationwide service network.  You could push it to near its limits on a twisty country road, and it was just a blast to drive.

Any new car design of this ilk will have critics.  It's easier, and more fun, to criticize than just "lamely say I like it".

I don't know if you read the linked article or not, but the author, Robert Cumberford, is a long-time car stylist--he worked on the Corvette in the 1950s--who has been analyzing car styling for one magazine or another for decades.
He won't just lamely say, "I like it" if he doesn't like it.

I went to a Mazda dealer to test drive a Miata, the sales guy laughed at me.

My sight line was right where the top of the windshield is.  No way could I fit with the top up.  I normally can recline the seat to get more headroom, but not in a Miata.

I don't even have the seat in the GTI all the way back.

Yep.  The Miata was not designed for the 95-percentile American male.

You probably wouldn't have fit well in an MGB either, I'll bet.  And the MGB had more room than the Miata.

seats go back further than in the past.  Every car/pickup I've owned I've always adjusted the seat as far back as it would go.

the 2015 Silverado double cab will go back a bit too far for me

I've also noticed this in a couple newer cars I've driven

I went to a Mazda dealer to test drive a Miata, the sales guy laughed at me.

My sight line was right where the top of the windshield is.  No way could I fit with the top up.  I normally can recline the seat to get more headroom, but not in a Miata.

I don't even have the seat in the GTI all the way back.

I sat in a Corvette convertible at the Chicago auto show back in about 1997 or so. I had the same experience with the Corvette. My eyes were right at the top of the windshield level.

A few years later, I test drove a Miata for my buddy. Illinois at the time [and perhaps still] would force you to surrender your physical license when you had a ticket for a written temporary, and Carmax wouldn't let him test drive. My left knee (had to use that leg as it was a 5spd) was pinned between the steering wheel and the door. That was a short test drive.

Now I want a sports car.  I'll get over it.  I'd probably go with a Cayman if I really bought one.

I assume you'd go with the Fourth generation : 718?
GTS???