About The Reviews

- How My Reviews Work -

    I started reviewing on a website that has lost its reputation within the Who community due to its catalog manager being a horrible human being and because that's where I got my start, my reviews are structured in a way so as to use that website's unique rating system. It allowed you to give a story a rating between 1 and 10 and leave a review if you want to, but also allowed you to rate the story's Plot, Acting, Effects, and Replay Value (Replay). On this website, I occasionally saw people write reviews where they would rate different minute aspects of a story, but the total they'd get would be like 40/100, but then the rating they gave to the story outside of the review would be a 9/10! It pissed me off, but I liked the idea, so I simplified it and actually cared about what I rated the different aspects of the story. The only cheating I do with my reviews is at the very end when determining the total score I give to a story, where I will allow myself to add 1 to or subtract 1 from the total rating of the story. So, for instance, if I love a story that should be an 8/10, I might increase the rating to a 9/10 and write a small explanation as to why I changed it. I believe that transparency is key in that sense.

The Plot Score:

    The plot sub-score is the most in-depth sub-score (aside from the effects sub-score when it is applied to television stories), being the average of 9 smaller ratings. These smaller ratings are as follows:  Story, Pacing, Dialogue, Narration, Exposition, Enjoyment, Twist/s, Resolution/s, and Ending/s. These are all rather self-explanatory, but I'll explain each a little bit just in case you are confused as to how they work exactly.

Story: The story rating measures how coherent and well crafted the story of whatever I'm reviewing is. This doesn't take into account 'originality,' I don't care if a story has been done before, so long as the version I'm talking about is good. I also don't care if it's 'important' or if it's 'filler.' I personally think people need to learn that good stories don't have to make you think, or leave you a changed person, or be completely new and revolutionary to be good.

Pacing: The pacing rating measures how good the pacing of a story feels. If it feels too fast, too slow, or if it's a hellish mixture of both, the rating will probably be rather low, but if the story is well-paced, whether it's slowly paced, quickly paced, or normally paced, the rating will probably be rather high. If everything feels like it has time to breathe, and nothing overstays its welcome, then the pacing is about as good as possible.

Dialogue: The dialogue rating measures how well-written the speech of characters is. If characters feel wooden, if they feel like they say things for no reason, or if they are generally unlikable, then the dialogue rating is going to be low. When exposition is delivered through dialogue, the quality of the writing of said exposition affects the dialogue score, whilst the usefulness and the natural inclusion of said dialogue affect the exposition score.

Narration: The narration rating isn't often used, but when it is, it simply rates how good the narration of a story is. It asks if a story's narration is well written, if it fits into the story, if it can be easily understood, etc.

Exposition: The exposition rating measures how well exposition is delivered, how natural it is, how much it actually tells you, within a story. How natural exposition is is the most important part of this, really, since exposition that makes no sense in existing is worse to me than just bad exposition.

Enjoyment: This rating measures how much I liked what I was reviewing over all. It doesn't matter if I "enjoyed it" since some media is meant to make you hate it or feel disgusted, so don't think it's a "fun" rating. It's pretty much how much I value the experience.

Twist/s: If a story has twists I will determine how successfully it pulled the wool over my eyes, how impactful the reveal was, how much it affected the story, etc. and boil it down into this rating.

Resolution/s: Stories don't just "end," they resolve, side-stories have conclusions, mysteries are solved the episode before the finale, and so on. Whenever a plot-line is concluded or something like that, I will rate how good the conclusion was, not just on a narrative basis, but based on all aspects of it, i.e. acting, effects, and replay.

Ending/s: When a part or episode or season or series ends, it can affect the entire experience, making you angry if it sucks or ecstatic if it's exactly how you imagined it. This rating goes over all the parts, narrative and otherwise, that make up an ending and break down how good of an ending it is.

***Adaptation: This rating only exists when a story I'm reviewing has been adapted from another medium. It also only matters if I am familiar with that media, because if not I will have no frame of reference. This rating isn't judging direct accuracy, but simply if an adaptation was necessary, hit the same notes, expanded upon scenes where needed or wanted, etc. Adaptations benefit most of the time from being accurate to the original, but a 1 for 1 remake in a new format generally isn't going to be that great.

The Acting Score:

    The only sub-score simpler than the Acting score is the Replay score. This sub-score is split into 4 parts, each one representing the acting of a different group. These groups are MC/s, or Main Characters, SC/s, or Side Characters, BG/s, or Bad Guys (the villains), and Narrator/s. I will give these simple explanations but the explanations won't be about how I judge them, but instead who exactly I'm judging, where I draw lines.

MC/s: If a character is one of the focal points of a story, a member of the core group of characters, appears in a large number, if not all of a series, then it's safe to say that they're a main character.

SC/s: If a character doesn't meet the criteria for being a main character and are not an active enemy of the main character/s then they are a side character be default. Yes, this is as arbitrary as it sounds.

BG/s: This rating is for characters who actively stand in opposition to the main character/s or stand on the immoral side. This is important to note because in my reviews of Only The Good, the Master is considered a main character, so anybody standing in opposition to him is considered a bad guy, despite the fact that they are likely on the right side of history. This is also important because main characters might differ in morality from each other; in this case all opponents of the main characters are treated the same and made bad guys no matter their actual moral alignment.

Narrator/s: This rating is for the narrator or narrators of a story. If a character does the narrating, this will rate their narration while the other category they belong to will judge their acting outside of the narration.

The AUDIO DRAMA Effects Score:

    This is the only sub-score so complicated and with such varying ratings that it cannot be described simply, so it will be split up into the 3 current formats of this sub-score, the first being the original, Audio Drama version. This score is made up of ratings for the audio drama's music, voice effects, action effects, background noises, and transitions.

Music: The music rating measures the quality of the music in a given audio drama.

Voices: The voices rating rates the voice effects of a given audio drama. If voices sound distant when they're distant, robotic when they're robotic, etc. then the score will be high, but if they are non-existent, lackluster, or just plain horribly done, then the score will suffer.

Actions: Audio dramas don't use visuals so action is portrayed through audio alone, even a cup being placed down is a purposefully added detail that exists to enhance the experience. Everything from explosions to walking is measured in this rating and it doesn't matter how little or how much there is so long as it's good and the audio drama doesn't feel lacking in action effects.

Background: The backgrounds of scenes have noises in them too, and these too are added on purpose in audio dramas, making a room feel alive when there's only two people actually talking in the foreground or filling an imaginary jungle with bugs and exotic birds. These can be minuscule, few and far between, massive, constant, or any other possible descriptor and still work well, so it really comes down to the feel of a particular audio drama and the amount of background effects usually won't matter all that much so long as what's there is all that needs to be.

Transitions: Audio dramas can't cut between scenes as easily as TV shows or movies can, so they often utilize transition effects to signal a swap in scenes. In the best instances these are either entertaining or fitting with the experience or they're so subtle yet effective that you barely notice them, seamlessly flowing from scene to scene. Sometimes, however, these effects can be overbearing or infuriating, or simply lacking all together; there are many factors to this rating.

The LIVE ACTION Effects Score:

    This is the only sub-score so complicated and with such varying ratings that it cannot be described simply, so it will be split up into the 3 current formats of this sub-score, the second being the live action version. This score is made up of ratings for music, voice effects, computer effects, practical effects, costumes/makeup, sets, action, cinematography, and sounds.

Music: The music rating measures the quality of the music in a given piece of live action media.

Voice Effects: The voice effects rating rates the voice effects of a given piece of live action media. If voices sound echoey when there's supposed to be an echo, robotic when they're robotic, etc. then the score will be high, but if they are non-existent, lackluster, or just plain horribly done, then the score will suffer.

Computer Effects: The Computer Effects rating describes the quality of the computer generated (CG) effects in a piece of media. These effects can often make or break a tv show or movie and over the years they've gotten much better and bad CG has become much more painful. It's important to note that I judge this rating on a sliding scale; a Doctor Who serial from the 70's can't be expected to have CG nearly as good as a blockbuster movie from last year, so while the effects might look bad by modern standards, I will approach reviewing a piece of media such as that on a more lenient basis and also with a mind of the time period. It also should be noted that bad CG in old media doesn't ruin it most of the time if you have the right mindset, but in some media it can't really be helped; sometimes old media also WILL be ruined by the CG, that is an option.

Practical Effects: The Practical Effects rating represents the quality of the non-CG effects in a piece of media. A practical explosion, squibs, puppeteering, all these things and more are counted in this category and, like with the computer effects category, this category is graded on a sliding scale, giving more leniency to older pieces of media.

Costumes/Makeup: The appearance of characters and monsters makes all the difference in live action, so good costumes and makeup are a must to really bring a show or movie together. The makeup doesn't have to be pretty, same with the costumes, they just need to do their job and not look poorly done.

Sets: The sets rating rates the quality of the sets in a show or movie. The number of sets doesn't count, nor does the complexity or prettiness, only the usefulness of the set, the character of the set, the fittingness of the set, the quality of the construction, etc. If it looks like a wall is made of cardboard and it bounces when someone puts their hand on it, then the rating will go down, but if a space ship's cockpit looks like it actually came straight from the future, then the rating will skyrocket.

Action: The action effect is all about the quality of the fighting and intense, thrilling moments of big effects. If a school is exploding, this will be altered, if two soldiers start shanking each other, this will be altered, if someone get's shot in the head, this will be altered. The amount of action or complexity doesn't matter so long as it is everything it should be and doesn't look poorly choreographed or uninspired.

Cinematography: The cinematography rating is determined by the quality of the camerawork in a show or movie. Framing, camera movement, focus, lighting, and style all come together in this rating.

Sounds: Most sounds in movies and TV shows aren't recorded on set, hence why you so often see people drinking from obviously empty cups but with sipping sounds anyway. Sound is integral to any medium and you have a lot of choices to make in what to include, what to highlight, what to cut, etc. This rating is based on how well something handles it's sound design in all aspects except musical.

The ANIMATION Effects Score:

    This is the only sub-score so complicated and with such varying ratings that it cannot be described simply, so it will be split up into the 3 current formats of this sub-score, the third being the most recent, the animation version. This score is made up of ratings for an animation's music, voice effects, 2D animation, 3D animation, set pieces, designs, action, cinematography, and sounds.

Music: The music rating measures the quality of the music in any animation.

Voice Effects: The voice effects rating rates the voice effects of a given animation. If voices sound distant when they're distant, robotic when they're robotic, etc. then the score will be high, but if they are non-existent, lackluster, or just plain horribly done, then the score will suffer.

2D Animation: Most animation in history has been 2D, flat images on flat backgrounds giving the illusion of 3 dimensional movement. In modern times that's not really changed, but 3D animation is being blended more and more into traditional 2D animations and 3D animations are becoming more and more prevalent. Still, the quality of an animation's 2D animation, should it exist, is crucial, since you don't want it to look choppy or lazy or stiff or anything like that. You also want to ensure it blends in well with any 3D that may be present. The order of this and 3D animation will be swapped for a primarily 3D animated show or movie.

3D Animation: Most animation in history has been 2D, flat images on flat backgrounds giving the illusion of 3 dimensional movement. In modern times that's not really changed, but 3D animation is being blended more and more into traditional 2D animations and 3D animations are becoming more and more prevalent. Unsurprisingly, 3D animation has more hurdles to jump than 2D animation, but it can also make 2D animation look and feel a lot better. This rating judges the quality of 3D animation in any given animation, and it will be especially harsh on any CG utilized in a mostly 2D animation since that often winds up being hideous. The order of this and 3D animation will be swapped for a primarily 3D animated show or movie.

Set Pieces: Set design is crucial, even in animation, but I refer to everything set related here in the set pieces rating since it feels more accurate since these aren't physical sets but pictures, just like everything else in animations. This rating also doesn't just look at the quality of set design but also the impact it has on scenes, since animation can control set pieces entirely and there's no reason for a set piece to hold back the rest of the animation in a show or movie. This will be particularly harsh on CG set pieces that clash with 2D animation.

Designs: The designs rating measures the quality of the non-set designs of any given animation. This includes character designs, weapon designs, magic energy designs, etc. You can usually expect to see this rating remain static since design quality tends not to go up or down in an animation, however everybody has off days.

Action: The action effect is all about the quality of the fighting and intense, thrilling moments of big effects. If a school is exploding, this will be altered, if two soldiers start shanking each other, this will be altered, if someone get's shot in the head, this will be altered. The amount of action or complexity doesn't matter so long as it is everything it should be and doesn't look poorly choreographed or uninspired.

Cinematography: The cinematography rating is determined by the quality of the camerawork in a show or movie. Framing, camera movement, focus, lighting, and style all come together in this rating. This can be a lot more creative and also a lot worse in animation, so this plays a bigger role than in live action media.

Sounds: Sound is integral to any medium and you have a lot of choices to make in what to include, what to highlight, what to cut, etc., especially when you have absolutely nothing to work with except some drawings and notes. This rating is based on how well something handles its sound design in all aspects except musical, which becomes all the more important in animation.

The Replay Score:

    This is the shortest, but in many ways one of the most important, sub-score I use to rate things. It rates how worthwhile it is to re-experience something at a later date. There's little worse than re-watching a show only to realize that the magic has been lost because you know what's coming next, but nothing is better than realizing that there's more to discover. This sub-score is only split into re-enjoyment and new details. Note that for my "bare-bones lite reviews" this sub-score does not exist, since those are my thoughts after a first watch/listen.

Re-Enjoyment: This rating shows how much I enjoyed my latest time through something I'm reviewing, specifically in relation to my first time through. If I really enjoyed it the second time through, but adored it far more the first time through then the rating will certainly be lower than the normal enjoyment score, since the second time was lesser.

New Details: There's nothing better than finding that something has more to offer in reward for watching or listening to it a second time but there's also nothing worse than discovering that you know what's coming and that the magic simply doesn't feel the same anymore since the mystery or fear isn't there anymore. If I don't find anything new in a piece of media I'm reviewing, this will be a 5, a lower rating will indicate that what I'm reviewing was worse on a second viewing due to foreknowledge and a higher rating will indicate that there was more to be discovered on a second viewing, expanding what I thought I knew about a piece of media.

Extra Information

NR = Not Rated (this can be for any number of reasons, but usually it simply isn't present to rate.)

Bare-Bones Lite Review = A review after my first time watching/listening to something. It is made without notes and does not include a replay score, making it less reliable but more indicative of my core feelings than a normal review.