|
Post by Jon Broxton on Aug 7, 2013 21:31:55 GMT -8
As you may have read on the main site, after much thought and deliberation, I have decided that, from now on, I will no longer be assigning star ratings to any of the reviews I write. The main reason for this is because, for too long now, I have had the feeling that many of my readers simply look at the star rating at the end of the review and use it as a quick and easy overview of my thought processes about a particular score, when in actual fact I want the meat of the review itself to convey my feelings. Slapping an arbitrary *** rating onto this score or that score really does nothing other than try to distill 2,000 words of prose into a single idea, whereas in reality the differences between three star, three-and-a-half star and four star ratings are subtle and can be swayed by all manner of different criteria.
So, here we go. I hope that the change in thinking will not be too radical for everyone. I do spend a lot of time crafting my thoughts and trying to put over intelligent arguments and detailed descriptions of each score I review, and hopefully the lack of an all-encompassing thumbs-up or thumbs-down will encourage people to really read what I write, (hopefully) understand my point of view about things, and stir up some interesting debate and discussion, both in the comments on the main site and here on the MMUK Discussion Board.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Aug 7, 2013 21:43:48 GMT -8
Ooh. Ok. That will take some getting used to for me. I know a lot of online score fans dismiss star ratings, but I really like them! They are your reviews, however, and your reasons are understandable. I will just have to get used to it.
|
|
|
Post by indy2003 on Aug 8, 2013 6:04:14 GMT -8
I definitely understand where you're coming from on this one. While I do appreciate the value of star ratings, I also realize that they sometimes have a way of forcing some to ignore anything else the review might have to say. Roger Ebert stated for years that he would have gotten rid of star ratings if the Chicago Sun-Times hadn't insisted that he keep them. For me (and for many other readers, I'm sure) they add to the depth of a review rather than remove from it, but I'd much rather have a substantial review without stars than an insubstantial review with them. I respect your decision and continue to look forward to reading your fine writing.
|
|
Roman
Scoring Assistant
Quick tip: Never let a werewolf drive your car.
Posts: 114
|
Post by Roman on Aug 8, 2013 6:51:12 GMT -8
I understand where you're coming from. When I was doing my anime reviews for the old animeondvd.com site (years and years ago) they let me create my own rating system. I decided to break each element down into a seperate rating and then provide an overall rating (based on the average, but with a nudge one way or the other). I refined this over time, adding an entertainment rating (because I kept running into items that were technically average, but were very entertaining). Going into that detail really helped define the final rating score.
When I went to write for Scifi Channel they asked that we keep it to simple star ratings as well as keep to much tighter word count. The result was a very difficult time reconciling the brief review with the star rating. In the end I found that star rating to be almost arbitrary.
When I started my blog up a few years ago, I really debated about the final star rating. But I ended up keeping my old anime reviewing style. I think it is easier to adapt that to movies. I'm not sure how you'd create a breakdown for music without getting extremely technical.
So all that typing and what it comes down to is... go for it. I think its a great idea. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Kevkis on Aug 8, 2013 7:46:15 GMT -8
I've always liked star ratings. Often, the first thing I do when I read reviews is skim towards the bottom to see the star rating, but I nearly always read the entire reviews. I really don't see the harm in putting a star rating anyway. Perhaps as a halfway solution, you could assign stars on the list of reviews but not on the actual reviews? (but first you would have to make all of the reviews available again - it's been a bit longer than 10-12 weeks!) Also, as a Wikipedia editor, I personally find it significantly easier to reference the star ratings and put them on a chart than try to search each review for a sentence or two that summarizes the reviewer's opinion. Just my two stars. ;D
|
|
|
Post by synchrotones on Aug 8, 2013 9:45:12 GMT -8
I understand and to a degree agree with your point. I certainly think you've built up enough of a following, and enough respect, to do away with a rating.
When I rebooted my reviewing tendencies with my website I thought about not applying a star rating, but decided against it because it is so familiar and easily accessible. I don't have the trust and following yet to go against tradition. (Personally, I still want a rating, but something other than stars or numbers... more like a phrase.) But also, I did a survey about how people 'consume' their filmmusic websites and it told me that people do really care for a star rating. So on that basis I didn't dare dismiss it either.
Having said all that... yeah, one 3-star score is not as good as another 3-star score. It is all about context. Not to mention that YOUR 3 stars are not the same as mine (I 'calculate' mine differently, I think, and end up giving at least 1/2 less than you would, opinions being equal).
Anyway, good riddance and good luck!
|
|
|
Post by Southall on Aug 8, 2013 13:14:18 GMT -8
A bold move. Well done. It was probably about 1999 when we first talked about this together! I'm still not bold enough.
|
|
|
Post by muckle dabuckle on Aug 9, 2013 4:45:09 GMT -8
I prefer the star ratings being that is the best way to compare scores. I have limited resources to buy scores and I'd rather buy a score that is the best over one that is just good (a five-star score compared to a four-star). Unless scores are specifically compared in the review it will be hard to tell which is best....unless you start using excessive adjectives to describe what were once called 5-star scores to make it obvious. ;D
I think giving a star rating makes you take a stand where not giving a rating may make a review seem wishy-washy like you are unable to judge (which is the point of a review). Plus, everyone is just going to assign a star rating in their head even if the reviews don't which isn't hepful because a lot of us haven't even heard the score but the reviewer has (the reason I read reviews is to judge whether or not I should buy a score for a movie I haven't seen or to justify my thoughts on scores I have heard). Not to mention star-rating controversies bring more Web site traffic. ;D
It's kind of like not keeping score during a sporting event.
|
|