Anime Reviews: Professional and Fans

[Diend Decade]

Do you think reviewers nitpick too much?!

 

[Lynxara]

I think most anime reviewers tend to fall into one of two camps:

1) They pretty much like anything because it exists and have no actual eye for things like animation quality, transfer quality, or sound mix quality.

2) They criticize shows based not on creative merits but on how well they fit preconceived notions of what the series should be, resulting in wacky **** like negative reviews of King Gainer that talk about how the opening theme detracts from the gritty war drama.

Basically: anime reviewers either aren't picky enough, or picky about completely stupid things. I don't read too many anime reviews as a consequence, just a few writers whose thoughts I find interesting.

(The writers I like tend to be pretty harsh, though, but I feel like there's nothing wrong with discussing the shortcomings in creative works.)

 

[Diend Decade]

My biggest problem is with reviews is that they don't consider the progressive change in opinion. Without it, I consider it as helpful as a blank sheet of paper.

I feel just saying criticizing without taking a multiple looks at it makes the review invalid to me. It doesn't really show that thought thoroughly. Even with thousands reviewing, I find that the biggest shortfall of all, when it comes down to it.

Also, there is a problem of whether it should be reviewed at all. If the review has been done thousands of times as it is on the internet. Why should it even be done really? I thinks it good to hear opinions, but I don't feel that is a good way of doing it.

The next reason should be blatantly obvious. It is forgetting the past anime when you watch it. This may seem weird, but I feel that is the only way to "reduce" biases on peoples' opinions. In other words, restart from zero with your opinion. When it comes time to criticize, it may be a more legitimate opinion.

 

[Sage Shinigami]

There's two problems with reviews:

1.) Either their tastes are such that they're always going laud the most pretentious or the most popular anime.

2.) Tastes vary from person to person. Really, this is problem #1, with an explanation. There's no shortage of professional reviews that will tell you how contrived *every shonen ever* (except One Piece...nobody ever insults One Piece >_<) is, and will go on to explain how some "artful" anime is the best thing ever.

The thing is, an anime one person finds derivative, another person might find something in that that resonates with them. For instance: Lynxara is a pretty intelligent person, from the posts I've seen of hers--but she thinks Blade is one of Kamen Rider's worst series due to elements in it she sees as derivative. I tend to listen to people who are able to type out reasoned, well constructed posts like her over people who mostly only geek/spazz out, but if I did that in this case, I'd miss out on one of my favorite television series of all time.

Shougo's also a pretty knowledgeable fellow (if a bit more grumpy than Lynxara :laugh, but (if I recall right) he HATED Magiranger. And he can tell you why, and they're all good reasons. But while I wouldn't call it one of the best, I did thoroughly enjoy the show.

In my case, its...well, anything remotely depressing, I'm bound to tear to pieces. Some people LIKE that though.

The bottom line is, one can criticize a series on only its own merits, pretty much making even its fans understand perfectly why you don't like it....but the series still has fans, and that's because while you see all these things to dislike in it, they've found things to love.

From anime to Toku to video games to comic books--its universal. The real problem with reviews, is that at the end of the day, if you're REALLY curious about the quality of something? You're going to need to check it out for yourself.\

 

[Diend Decade]

Sage Shinigami. As for merits and fans, I feel it doesn't even go halfway.
People get the short end of the straw, no matter what.

I wish it could be as simple as love, but that isn't going to happen anytime soon. If people did love it, they will literal focus on that or follow a cycle that will lead them back to that anime.

I don't think taste matters. People seen a lot of diversity and re-use of story-lines. A review has to persuade the readers to watch the anime. It's better than a lousy summary. I think everyone could do that on their own.

I'll follow up on your example. If Lynxara, does an actual progressive check of any series without considering anything else around her. It would be better to extend the time of the example. It would be done in 40 years, 5, and 10 years intervals for each progress review.

Also, she has to do it "blind" for that time. No spoilers, No expectations, no fandoms, Close to no memory of it. Nostalgia should be kept to a bare minimum or forgotten completely. If Lynxara consistently review the anime with the same results, then I would take her word on it. I would consider her opinion a "solid" opinion from that.

As for criticizing, it would help if some people can be quiet for a moment to let other people speak. Instead of pointing a red bull-eye at the person, when it comes to discussing. Give someone a chance to speak! Give them time to counter back. Yes, I do think they are kicking a baby horse when they do that. That is a major reason for members anywhere not to post to criticism.

I don't trust people enough to say that they are "constructively criticizing" the work. I feel a blind review has more weight than bias reviews. They could fake their opinion as well. It isn't a good thing to do, but people do it. You know a person to a limited extent or you don't know them at all.

 

[Lynxara]

I tend to listen to people who are able to type out reasoned, well constructed posts like her over people who mostly only geek/spazz out, but if I did that in this case, I'd miss out on one of my favorite television series of all time.

A well-written negative review is still able to point people who would like the show in question toward investing time in it. That's my Platonic idea for reviewing, anyway. I don't think my writing is consistently there at this point, but I know I've pulled it off a few times.

What I wrote about Blade was no true review. It was a criticism, a very one-sided evaluation that focused on its negatives. If I was flat-out reviewing Blade I would be a bit more even-handed and give the show some points for being solid if somewhat bland superhero fare.

The only real point in noting where something is derivative is, generally, when the work in question is handling the idea more poorly than its inspiration did. So my big problem with Blade is that for any viewer who liked particular elements of it-- they would probably enjoy Blade's predecessors a lot more.

The one exception is Blade's Showa-style heroics. Younger viewers tend to have a very hard time watching backward to the Showa stuff, because it's just so unlike modern television. So I can see a place for Blade as a pure superhero story, updated for modern tastes, even if personally I would rather just go watch Black.

It's important to remember that people can love a show for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with the show's content. Fashion, marketing, and many other factors can play a role in a viewer's emotional response.

Most casual viewers project heavily into their entertainment, and tend prefer what is easiest to project into. For viewers like this, reviews are absolutely useless because ultimately, whether the work is bad or good creativity is irrelevant to them. Their reaction will be wholly personal and subjective.