You must be logged in to leave comments. Login or sign up today!
Btw what do you mean when you say Gundam tails off in its later series?
LOGH wasnt really genre defining at all, the space battles were hardly watchable and repetative, literally they replayed the same clips often. the characters were bland, one of them was meant to be intelligent but all the strategy he seemed to come up with was totally basic and predictable. I couldnt make myself watch the entire series it just really began to drag but I did go in to the series wanting to like it.
I shall check out nadesico sometime!
Read some of the review and not just the overall score, the story got a 6 anyways.
I didn't like a lot of the Gundam reviews, just seemed to me the reviewer really thought Legend of the Galactic Heroes was better and they wanted to show that.
Laputa Castle in the sky <3, I might check out Martian Successor Nadesico.
Wait a bit. I'm not saying that they dislike the genre because they marked it bad, it does not apply speaklng in a general way. But it applies to much around here. It doesn't have to be a must, but it is too often, if you know what I mean. For example, a while ago, I was reading a review regarding Full Moon wo Sagashite. Idk who made since I never look at the author but I was completely shocked when I read it. I only peeked a little bit at the overall, by mistake, not intentionally, but I was left with a bad taste in my mouth, mainly because I've seen the show, and I know what it sent and what it did not.
I don't want to say Full Moon wo Sagashite is a masterpiece, because it is not. Remember when I said that reviews made to shows that hint a different audience? Well the person that made the review clearly viewed from a different audience, so I understood why he did not like the show. But to tear it apart just because of that...don't know, tell me if this is something a pro reviewer does. And I think the same author did review Yumeiro Patissier (dunno exactly how it is written) because the writing style and the same disgusting way of ranting a show was present on that one as well. It's not like I care for the show, I don't give a shit, but I see persons commenting "I am glad that I did not watch this show yet" or "I will remove this one from my want to watch list". Basicaly the person refuzes to watch a show, because of rant that made it look bad. I have experience in this manner, tasted it myself and seen other people being blocked by such reviews. But when I or other people gave it a shot, surprise, it was not that bad.
I don't want to drag this on, but I have friends and acquaintaces that seen as much or maybe more anime than I did and they have the same opinion about the A-P reviewrs. Some of them introduced me to The Nihon Review as well years ago. There was also a reviewer that made a review for Angel Beats!, I think vivafruit was but I might be mistaking. Seeing a show that completely lacked character development and it had more plot holes than a swiss cheese getting a rating almost on par (1 point difference) with a masterpiece like Nana, it really disappointed me mainly because the same reviewer did a hell of a good job with other reviews (5 Centimeters, Beyond the Clouds, ParaKiss, Monster to name a few). This is not about like or dislike, but come on, Nana wasn't finished either, but it solved several plot holes. It did not need a teary ending in order to fool the mases and the character development is on a whole different level compared to Angel Beats! Sometimes I wonder why the author bothered giving names to the characters, they should've named them A, B, C...yet the author of the review saw in it a 6.5 if I remember well. Funny thing is that the author thinks of doing an imminent sequel because of the plot holes this one left. It was a failure from the beginning considering that they presented a huge cast and the lenght of the show did not allow him to develop them all.
And btw, there is nothing to be in awe, everything anime has good and bad points, because the men that did it are not good or bad from nature, they have them both. I don't want to get into philosophy but I learned it while watching anime. Good and bad points are always present in a show, it depends how the human mind takes it, because objectivity never exists, only subjectivity. Someone that loves something praises it, someone that hates something loathes it, its only common. Though this is the thing I want to see from a reviewer, even when loathing a show, he should be capable of seeing what was really good and what was really bad, because like I said above good does not exist without bad, they co-exist.
Look, a competent reviewer should review both the negative and the positive points (an anime has both, without a doubt). I've seen VivisQueen's reviews and she is a competent one in certain genres. I saw the reviews of other reviewers on this site, and I've seen that what they prefer in anime has big ratings, and what they don't they give shit reviews mainly because "they are not fans of that genre or they aren't in the targeted audience". The only thing I appreciate is the advanced vocabulary and the slangs they use when they review a show. That is a hint that they have done a lot of reading and they are not that bad when it comes to write about something, but that is pretty much all there is to it.
On The Nihon Review for example. Even shit shows with ratings lower than 4-5 are not treated like they are here. Meaning that the reviewers there realize that even though those shows lack stuff in many aspects (characters, story, etc) it sent what it wanted to send for the audience.
I did not look who did Fate/Stay Night because when I read a review I don't look at the author I only judged the work. I remember I commented about it that the rating was a little bit harsh but that is there is to it, I liked that the author (you), grasped all there is to it. I am a fan of Fate/Stay Night so I am allowed to be subjective, that's why I never did a review about the movie. I mainly played the game and I did not watch the TV series yet.
One thing I have to say, before reviewers start writing rants on this site, they should know how to review a show in a competent manner, only after that they should start saying what is good and what is bad. I almost never said that a show is bad (only exception is Angel Beats! which managed to manipulate the ignorant herd). But the rest, I managed to find bad and good points in them.
Academically speaking you might be more competent than me since there is an age difference between us. I read a lot of reviews/day, but A-P has few reviews that managed to attract me and make me read them. A good reviewer should managed to attract the attention of the reader, even if the review is positive or negative.