Forum - View topicHey, Answerman! - Negative Nellies
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
RyanSaotome
 Posts: 4210 Location: Towson, Maryland |
|
|||
|
On the topic about negative reviews and such, I think a lot of people go about reviews in the wrong way. They seem to think everything needs to be a really intellectual thing or an amazing story... but the fact is, they don't. I've always believed that any medium should be reviewed based on the goal of the product. For example, a comedy should be graded based on how funny it is. Or a fanservice show should be graded on the quality of its fanservice. Or an action show should be graded on the quality of its action. They shouldn't all just be marked down because they lack an "Emotional Story" or "Believeable characters", since that was never their goal in the first place.
|
||||
|
||||
TitanXL
 Posts: 4036 |
|
|||
|
If you really change your opinion of a show after reading a review it sounds like you didn't have much of an opinion to begin with and are just looking for a shepherd to follow around. It's even worse with those those 'angry internet review' things which are always so forced and staged, then you got people parroting their quotes without actually thinking for themselves or have even watched/played what the subject was.
Yeah, there's that too. Not to mention it's painfully obvious when someone is reviewing something because they 'have to' and not out of a genuine interest. It's pretty clear when they didn't put any effort into liking or even wanting to like a show. Last edited by TitanXL on Fri Sep 14, 2012 3:10 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
superdry
 Posts: 1309 |
|
|||
That sounds like the IGN review of Double Dragon Neon I just read yesterday. |
||||
|
||||
BonnKansan
 Posts: 116 |
|
|||
Well, what makes one comedy funnier than another? What makes better quality fanservice? Couldn't engaging and believable(not necessarily 'realistic') characters contribute to both of these? Couldn't great animation, art, plot, direction and timing give the fanservice or comedy greater impact? The 'comedy' and 'fanservice', etc., don't exist in a vacuum. It may only need to do one thing well to be successful with its primary audience, but couldn't doing other things well help it do that one thing better too? And with reviews, the better ones do take into account the genre and expectations, and give the series credit for what it does do well. But what's wrong with reserving the highest score or praise for shows that manage to both fulfill and transcend their subgenre, and appeal to more than just the hardcore niche fans? Not all shows need to do that to be 'fun' or 'good', but it's nice if more of them try to, to improve our odds of getting at least one really 'great' memorable show like, say, Madoka Magica each year. |
||||
|
||||
shabaz92
 Posts: 55 Location: MA |
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
Zac
ANN Executive Editor
 Posts: 7912 Location: Anime News Network Technodrome |
|
|||
A lot of this is just "critics don't tend to like what I like" rather than any meaningful criticism of the review process. "Just like it for what it is!" "Don't pay attention to anything other than what the show is doing right" "You should want to like everything" "it's fun to hate stuff so just hate everything and people will pay attention to you". These are all statements that to me totally disqualify anyone from even commenting on how they think reviews 'should' be done. If your opinion on the matter can be boiled down to "these reviews don't agree with my opinion, therefore they're wrong", then you aren't really worth listening to on the issue. |
||||
|
||||
|
Keichitsu0305
|
|
|||
ಠ_ಠ 26 animated TV episodes; an alternative ending film; two compilation films; a manga (which technically started before the show) ongoing for nearly a decade; three non-canon manga from other writers; multiple video games (including a dating sim); a store in Harajuku; and the four part Rebuild films. Not too mention some pretty funny parodies from other TV shows. Oh. And lots of merchandise. Safe to say that there's no reason for another reboot; plenty of media to last this franchise for years. I hope Anno makes something new with Studio Khara once the Rebuild tetralogy is done. |
||||
Chagen46
 Posts: 4377 |
|
|||
A reviewer is under no obligation to like a show. Their job is to watch it and then rate it, giving the reasons as to why they rated it that way. |
||||
|
||||
|
RyanSaotome
Posts: 4210 Location: Towson, Maryland |
|
|||
|
In the end, reviews are pretty pointless unless you share similar tastes to the person reviewing something. So if someone really likes say... a Josei drama, and you are a fan of those, then you should check it out. But if you're not a fan of Josei dramas, then the review likely won't mean much to you. On the flip side, if you like slice of life and moe stuff, but the reviewer doesn't, it shouldn't really matter if they give it a bad score... They were never going to like it in the first place, so it doesn't really impact its actual quality. There will always be biases towards certain genres, even if the reviewer tries to be fair.
Last edited by RyanSaotome on Fri Sep 14, 2012 3:57 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
Cecilthedarkknight_234
 Posts: 3820 Location: Louisville, KY |
|
|||
That's if your a professional or being told to do this get money/paid for a living. I am sure some of you know that I review stuff in my spare time. Now I have the option of choosing what ever I like to review because I'm not a professional, even if i do reviews for jast-usa on the side. Then there are copy pasta reviews that get posted for 9gag/4chan on MAL, AD, Amazon etc for shi* and giggles that people actually take seriously. @ryan this is why I read a lot of reviews from key or Rebecca because they have along the same taste that I do. Last edited by Cecilthedarkknight_234 on Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
Zin5ki
 Posts: 6680 Location: London, UK |
|
|||
There was seemingly a certain force with which the first of these comments was asserted. That a person could ignore their peers' suggestions and evaluations concerning what ought to be given "aesthetic" attention, attending instead only to their most basic of pleasures was presented — quite reasonably — as something problematic, something one would exhort a reader to avoid. Though let us consider the person who does just this, someone who maintains her obstinateness through wilful avoidance of other people's critiques and comments. Recognising the first of the above quoted passages as an act of criticism, insofar as it is part of the ongoing critical "discussion" you described, she dismisses its point and thereby ignores the aforementioned force through which it was to supposed to influence her. If she were to attempt to justify her avoidance of all writings of a "critical" ilk, such as that of the first quote, she could take parsimonious recourse to what is stated in the second quote: that there is a sense in which neither she nor you is incorrect to hold your respective views, and by the same token that there is nothing incorrect in her stubbornness. (After all, she might say, surely what each party holds on the matter is his or her respective opinion, whatsoever this precisely means.) How, out of personal interest, would you propose to address this issue? If a person is not only free to hold the views they do, but also free to do so without incurring error, are we then in a position to specify that such a freedom doesn't extend to the holding of obdurate views about other people's critical contributions? Doubtlessly there are many straightforward ways of doing this, though your own views would be enlightening. |
||||
|
||||
danilo07
 Posts: 1580 |
|
|||
Not really for every genre there are objective standards .I am pretty sure Key is not insane when it comes to josei dramas,yet in every anime preview guide in which he wrote about josei dramas he gave them a positive review. |
||||
|
||||
Keonyn
 Subscriber Posts: 5567 Location: Coon Rapids, MN |
|
|||
Not at all. A well-written review will provide enough of the details to determine whether you will or will not agree with the reviewers viewpoint. It's a reviewers job to flesh out the dominant elements of what they're reviewing and provide their take on these elements and their justifications. This allows the reader to not only know what these key elements are, but how and why someone does or doesn't dislike them. You don't need to agree with the reviewer because the reviewer should provide you with enough information to determine which side of that fence you would also be on. Their job isn't to echo your opinion, but to voice their own and provide enough to compare that to your own. |
||||
|
||||
Fencedude5609
 Posts: 5088 |
|
|||
Huh? I'm not following that logic. At any rate, shows need to be judged not only by their "objective" "quality", but by how well the achieve what they set out to do. For example, from the "Objective quality" viewpoint, NakaImo is trash. However when judged by the standards of what its trying to be, a trashy fanservice comedy, its a great success. Now, if you really can't stand trashy fanservice comedies, then you won't like it, but if you do, NakaImo is one of the standouts of the genre. Not everything needs to be a deep masterpiece of writing and drama. Some shows, or books, aren't trying to be that, and are perfectly enjoyable for what they are. This isn't "lowering my standards" or "settling for genre crap" its "enjoying things that entertain me." NakaImo is both objectively terrible, and one of the most fun shows of the season. |
||||
|
||||
|
danilo07
Posts: 1580 |
|
|||
|
@Fencedude5609 Can you tell me what NakaImo is trying to be?Like what emotions it wants to provoke etc...
|
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group