So my rating scale might seem a little odd. I never give tens, and say that sevens are high and eight and nines are something special. I just wanted to explain this a bit for anyone who is confused. My rating system goes from zero to ten, not one to ten, scaling everything down. Also, unlike most people, great isn't a ten, perfect is a ten, so if something manages to be a perfect representation of itself it will then, and only then, score a ten, which doesn't happen often, if ever. In short the scale looks like this:
0: Not worth anyone's time, should not have been made, and, in my mind, doesn't exist (Jersey Shore, etc.)
1: brings something worthwhile to the table, but still pretty horrid
2: Your average crap
3: Not entirely terrible, but I won't be dealing with it a second time
4: A bit below average, but still worth paying mind to if it is part of a greater, better whole
5: Just on the cusp of average
6: Absolutely average
7: Better than average. You should take a look
8: Much better than average. You really should take a look
9: Exceptional. Definitely take a look
10: Perfection, at least within the sphere of its existence
I also place heavy emphasis on how much potential a reviewed material shows going forward within its own franchise. This can add anywhere from half a point to three points, but will likely never yield a score of ten.
No comments:
Post a Comment