How I write and enjoy anime reviews

Since I just finished writing a bunch of anime reviews over the past few posts, I figured now is a good time to bring up this topic that I’m sure anyone who reads and/or writes anime reviews has thought about: what makes them enjoy reading certain kinds of reviews over others, and if they write reviews themselves, what kind of voice and structure do they give their reviews…

It’s funny that way back when I first started my blog in 2006, I wanted to use it specifically to review anime (as opposed to the mostly editorial posts I’ve come to write over the years). Since I had never written reviews on my old fan site, I wasn’t sure what kind of style I wanted to use. Some of the reviews I read back then followed certain structures, like giving the anime letter grades or categorizing the review into different areas and then discussing each in turn, like “Story,” “Characters,” and “Animation.” So in my early days of reviewing, especially when I reviewed video games more, I organized my reviews that way, as you can see in this old review of mine for Pokemon Ranger.

But it didn’t take long for me to find a structure that worked for me…which, oddly enough, ended up being no set structure. When I was new to the whole thing, I felt like I had some kind of obligation to talk about all the different aspects of an anime, from the story and characters to the art and music, or else it wouldn’t be a proper review. But then I figured, for a lot of anime I simply don’t have anything to say about all these different aspects. For example, not every anime has music or animation that stood out to me in either a good or bad way, so why make myself discuss it when I don’t feel it matters? Or in another case, why try and talk about a story/plot in an anime when it’s basically a plot-less slice-of-life series strictly driven by the comedy of its characters? I could say a little about these things if I had to, but why waste time going on about a part of an anime I felt had no bearing on its quality when I could be more thoroughly discussing parts of it that do?

These thoughts are eventually what lead to the reviewing style I have today, which is basically free-style: I just say everything I feel needs to be said about the anime in a way that I feel best suits my particular thoughts on that anime. For some series, it’s better if I discuss the characters first and then the story, or vise versa. Other times it’s better if I just talk about the series’ good points and then its bad points. Other times, if it’s a shorter series, it’s better if I quickly go through each episode chronologically and comment on them. Anime series can be so different from each other so it’s natural that they don’t all fit well into only one reviewing structure. My main goal for writing anime reviews is to express all that I want to say about the anime I watch and I do that best when I have no restrictions and don’t have to compromise what I want to say so that it fits into a set structure. This is also the reason why I don’t hold back as far as spoilers in my reviews.

Speaking of which, because I feel that my reviews should be read by either someone who’s seen the anime I’m reviewing already, or doesn’t mind being spoiled, one thing I don’t care to have in my reviews that many people do is a synopsis. A lot of reviews have a paragraph or two describing what the anime is about (usually without spoilers) before going into their personal feelings on it. I don’t include synopses mostly because I just don’t enjoy writing them, especially when I have to compromise my writing by avoiding spoilers and making sure they don’t go on too long (even if that particular anime has a lot to it as far as story/plot). I figure, there are plenty of other source someone can look at to find out what an anime is about, so my review doesn’t have to be one of them and should just be a review. People tend to go overboard with synopses even when writing their first impressions of just one episode of a new anime, as Timeenforceranubis recently brought up. He even pointed out the same old formula blogs tend to follow when writing their “first impressions”:

“First, there’s discussion of the show on a whole, perhaps the pedigree of the studio and staff, and maybe some talk about the hype leading up to the show. Then, we get a synopsis of the first episode. Then, we get the author’s impressions of the story, characters, and art. Some even venture further and try to pass judgment on the show based on the first episode.”

While I think this formula may be alright for reviewing an entire series (again, not how I would do but it could work for others) it seems like a time-waster to thoroughly describe what happens in that first episode. If it’s supposed to be your “impressions” or a “review,” half of it shouldn’t be a synopsis. As Timeenforceranubis suggested, it’s better to talk about the potential a new series could have rather than judge it based on one episode or spend half the time just describing what happened that anyone who watched the episode could easily see (another reason I don’t review just one episode in my first impressions but prefer 2-3. One episode is just too early to judge in most cases).

Despite constantly changing up the way I review, my tone remains the same for all of them: I try to stay serious and down-to-earth in my reviews. I might throw in a joke here and there, but I know comedic and witty writing is not my strong point at all, so that’s why I just stick to a general tone, trying to be passionate but at the same time, not too opinionated. Since I believe anime is meant to be enjoyed by all kinds of people, I try to see the good in every series I watch, but I also want to be fair and point out flaws even in series that I like. I go into my reviews knowing that no anime is obligated to match my particular idea of what’s good, and if it does, I need to say why, and if doesn’t, I need to explain why as well.

But while I try to keep a “glass half full” outlook with every anime I watch and try not to spend time ranting and hating on any particular thing unless I can give reasons for it, I actually do enjoy reading reviews that are more on the ranting side, especially if they do it in a funny way (that’s one reason I’m a big fan of Nostalgia Critic). Frog-kun recently pointed out the merits of negative reviews in a post of his and I agree with most of those points. Even for anime you like, you shouldn’t take them so seriously that you can’t laugh at their flaws. As long as the writer of the review has a tone and style that entertains me, whether because they’re funny or I find what they have to say interesting and logical, I don’t care if the review is negative or positive. As Frog-kun said at the end of his post as far as the purpose of anime reviews, “It’s not about who has the best opinion or who has the most insight. It’s about seeing what other people have to say and coming up with your own interpretation that satisfies you. You can’t really say that your opinion is your own, after all, until you’re aware of what others think.”

So what kind of review do you most enjoy? Negative or positive? Funny or serious? And if you write reviews yourself, what kind of style and tone do you like to keep, if any?