Currently Reviewing the K-On! Series:

(I'll be getting back to it soon...)

1. K-On! 1st Season
2. K-On!: Live House!
3. K-On!! 2nd Season
4. K-On!!: Keikaku!
5. K-On! Movie

Just a guy who watches anime and reviews it every now and then. I'm usually rather quiet but I don't mind discussions. My activity here is sporadic and lengthy periods of inactivity are normal for me.

Previously used profile pictures:

Info on how I rate things:

My ratings are based on the following general attributes:

60% ~ Plot; everything involving the story & characters, and how they were used. My main focus is on structure and purpose, as I've found that plots which can't maintain those are far less likely to be effective in telling an interesting story. Plots do not need to be complex, just compelling.
20% ~ Effects; animation, sound, et cetera in relation to what is necessitated by the plot. It can't just be pretty for its own sake; these need to be used in an effective manner.
20% ~ Cohesion; how much the anime's elements flow with or clash against one another. It's why it's possible to enjoy some especially campy trash, or get bored with something you can tell is well-made. I consider this attribute to be the logical endpoint when deciding to split a score across multiple aspects, as it represents the idea that the separated parts don't always equal the value of the whole when tallied together.

Things I don't care about:

Complexity ~ Complexity seems to get confused with depth quite often, even though complexity isn't a prerequisite for depth. Complexity is merely how much work it takes to understand something, which isn't a meaningful trait on its own. Something that manages to maintain simplicity while still being deep tends to be better written or presented that something that did so in a complex but equally deep way.
Novelty ~ One of the most overrated aspects of storytelling, if you ask me. A hundred well-told stories that follow a similar structure are still well-told, and a hundred poorly written stories that are one-of-a-kind are still poorly written. Execution supersedes any inherent value that I've seen novelty be claimed to possess.
Prior Releases ~ My ratings are based on the latest version of an anime to be released (that I'm aware of / have access to). If a studio takes the time to make changes in a new version, I will consider that new version to be the only official version. This isn't to be confused with alternate versions (i.e. Toei's Kanon adaptation vs KyoAni's Kanon adaptation) rather it's when the same entry is re-released with changes.
Rewatchability ~ I rarely rewatch anything unless I'm re-assessing my thoughts on it, so rewatchability is not a rating consideration for me.

What my numbers mean:

The idea is to have my ratings easily reflect a gradient rather than have sharp cutoffs for their meaning, but we'd be here forever if I went into specifics for each single number or the semantics of the system (these numbers are just a convenient shorthand after all). So here's a simplified /11 scale translation, just keep in mind that numbers like 87 & 88 aren't so drastically different from each other, rather they drift closer to separate meanings when the system is generalized like this.

96 - 100 = Incredible ~ Any flaws, shortcomings, & nitpicks are all but completely overshadowed by the work's strengths. Not to be confused with "perfect", but a definite favorite for me.
88 - 95 = Great ~ Near-incredible with one major / too many minor flaws to be waived. I'd still say it's memorable and consistently excels at its goals.
78 - 87 = Memorable ~ Has inconsistent sparks of excellence. It could be incredible but has enough flaws to mar the experience as a whole.
68 - 77 = Satisfactory ~ Consistently good, but any excellent moments merely balance out the flaws. Not really memorable or special.
59 - 67 = Passable ~ Good at times but not consistently so. Still more good than bad though.
50 - 58 = Mediocre ~ Has a balanced amount of good and bad aspects. Often this is the result of a show that excels in one or two areas but fails in one or two others.
40 - 49 = Lacking ~ Has more bad than good aspects, but by a close margin. May still have appreciable bits, and likely could have been satisfactory under better circumstances.
30 - 39 = Inadequate ~ Consistently bad overall, even if there are some decent parts. Often completely missing the one thing that could have possibly redeemed it.
20 - 29 = Misguided ~ Something in its core concept is flawed. It couldn't become satisfactory without becoming something entirely different.
10 - 19 = A Mistake ~ So heavily flawed and/or lacking that it's a struggle to watch all the way through. Poking at its flaws is more worthwhile than anything the work managed on its own.
0 - 9 = Unredeemable ~ It's a bad experience in its entirety - less fulfilling than watching paint dry. Its very existence is a flaw.

You might say that I take this too seriously. I would say that I simply enjoy doing it like this.

Recommendation scale:

88-100 = Very yes.
68-87 = Yes.
50-67 = Only if you were interested to begin with.
30-49 = No.
0-29 = No, not even ironically

+1 scale level to anime in the Laughably Bad, Therefore Fun list, as those have a special appeal outside of their actual quality.

AWC Beginner's Challenge post:

I decided to start this to see if it got me to watch anime on a more regular schedule. Life ended up getting in the way though. Oh well, all the anime I have on there were on my Planning or Paused list anyhow, so there's no reason not to keep going. My post/progress is here.

Genre Overview

55 Entries
50 Entries
44 Entries
42 Entries
33 Entries
Total Anime
Days Watched
Mean Score