Don't write reviews!
Jun 08 '01
The Bottom Line is that I probably don't know what I'm talking about. I concede the point. Please don't comment saying, "Hey Vormancian, you don't know what you are talking about."
Early on in my career at Arizona State University, I took an anthropology class. On the first day of class, after the professor dispensed with the normal, routine affairs, he stepped up to the podium and announced that the first thing we would be talking about was why men were taller than women.
There was an immediate surge of activity, as pens and notebooks flashed into readiness. The professor stood for a few moments with the clear appearance of someone waiting for everyone to get ready. When the noise stopped, and the entire class was hovered over their paper in anticipation, the professor cocked his head and simply continued to wait. He took a few steps away from the podium and seemed to be considering something. He waited. He turned toward us.
"The first thing I want you to write in your notes," he finally said, "and I want you to write it in large letters, is that no one argued against the idea that men are taller than women."
He went on to note that no one had spoken up and said, "Excuse me professor, but I know some women that are taller than some men."
For the rest of the course, when people would argue vehemently against some of his points, he would counter by saying, "Yes, and some women are taller than some men."
On that first day, I didn't think it was that interesting. As the class went on, and I saw the way people turned red, I realized why he started his classes that way. When he said that women generally are attracted to power and status, and men are generally attracted to looks, people went nuts.
Whatever your view on anthropology might be, taking that class did teach me some things. Some generalizations are true, for one. People generally (ha ha) hear generalizations as absolutes. When my professor said that women are generally attracted to power and status, people (men and women) offered as evidence that they weren't (or their girlfriends weren't, or they knew people who weren't, whatever) and voiced their idea as though a single case can overturn a generalization.
And why am I telling you this? Well, one, I like the story. Two, I am about to make a generalization. That generalization is that reviews suck. Now, of course, the difference here is that this is only my opinion, and isn't based on any facts (like measuring men, measuring women, comparing the two sets of data).
But, I stand behind my generalization. By reviews, I am talking about such things as book and movie reviews in newspapers, you might even count product reviews in magazines and such. There are, of course, exceptions. Please don't write comments about some movie critic you think is really great. There are some that are actually worth the time they take to read.
Mostly, they aren't, and they aren't really what we are about here (again, in my opinion). There are no facts to back up my statement, but consider the amount of time and effort put into reading epinions. I read a lot of epinions, but you couldn't pay me enough to sit and look through newspapers and magazines, and read review after review.
In the last few days I can't count the number of epinions I have read on Shrek and Pearl Harbor. Most of them were just reviews. Of the literally hundreds I must have read, there are only around ten that stand out in my mind at all. You can tell the ones that are reviews, because they look just like what you would find in the newspaper.
They will usually tell you what the movie is about. I don't know about everyone else, but unless it is a lesser known movie, I don't want a synopsis of what the movie is about. Who doesn't know what Shrek is about? Now, of course, I mean the really trivial synopses that don't tell you much more than you knew right from the trailers.
Then, we go on with some information about the more technical aspects of the movie. The direction, the cinematography, what a splendid job the gaffer did and whatnot. These are all fine things to include in your epinions, but not when they aren't especially noteworthy. Don't talk about every possible aspect of every movie just to be able to say you did.
In fact, don't review a movie (or book, or whatever) just because you've seen it (or read it, or ummm used it?). You don't work for a newspaper. You don't have to write an epinion about it. You don't have a deadline to meet. And, your epinions are going to be stale unless you really have something to say.
We want to hear what you would tell your friends if they asked you about the movie. The chances are that unless for some reason the direction, editing, or whatever really caught your eye, you aren't going to mention it. I can't imagine that when chatting with your friends about some new movie you are going to always mention these things.
Besides, if we wanted to read the 'newspaper style' reviews, we have a better place to get them.
There is a similar sort of thing happening with reviews of such things as stereos, televisions, cell phones, toasters, etc. These things are getting a lot of epinions which resemble Consumer Reports type reviews. Consumer Reports provides a wealth of useful information on products. What they don't provide is good reading. No one (okay, I'm sure someone) gets the yearly special Consumer Reports buyer's guide and just sits and reads the thing cover to cover.
Likewise, if you see a review in the newspaper for a book that you would never read, that you knew couldn't possibly appeal to you, you are unlikely to read the review. You might, however, read an epinion about it if it is by someone you know.
That about sums up my point, I think. I haven't really been here that long (not in a real, spend a lot of time here sort of way), and I trust a lot of people (considering how long I've been here). Still, most of the people I trust got on my WOT because I could probably guess they wrote their epinions even if you gave them to me unlabeled.
Now, like I said, there are people who write in newspapers who are excellent. Mostly, however, you don't walk away from such reviews with more than a vague notion of like or dislike. The critics of such things seem to write as though they have a checklist with them when watching a movie.
Circle one for each of the following.
Lead actor - good - bad
Lead actress - good - bad
Direction - good - bad
Insert witty anecdote here
Discuss variation in acting skills of lead actor as compared to roles in other movies.
Script - good - bad
And on and on, you get the idea. Don't make this how you write.
We all call them reviews when we talk about what we do here at epinions, but let's don't make them reviews.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
Vormancian
|
 - Top 500 |
|
Member: Marc Eastman
Location: Bangor,ME
Reviews written: 330
Trusted by: 352 members
About Me:
Evangeline Sylvan Betty Eastman. AKA "Cricket" 9/12/06
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.