Ryhzik's Blog

Back to Ryhzik's Blog

Intro

This is my current framework for rating/judging anime and manga. I'm going to tackle both mediums at once as I think they have significant overlap in evaluation criteria. I won't be covering the other medium commonly consumed in this space: light novels. (I would rate light novels the same as any other text-centric medium and will leave this topic for another time.)

There are three main criteria I evaluate when rating anime and manga: artistry, narrative efficacy, and personal enjoyment. Another important component of rating is how the criteria are weighted. I will cover this as well.


Artistry

In anime and manga, the visual elements are a core mechanism for establishing the aesthetic of a story. Even though the two mediums handle this somewhat differently, there are common concerns. For example, the art should aim to communicate the experiences of the characters, emotional and corporeal. It should also adhere to a reasonable standard of perceived quality (i.e., it should be aesthetically pleasing; this is obviously subjective). Rather than belabor general points like these, I'm going to focus on some medium-specific criteria. I think this will better reveal the types of things I care about in this category.

One visual component specific to anime is, of course, the animation. This isn't something that is particularly important to me. If it's passable, I'm usually satisfied. I will give or retract credit from exceptionally good (e.g., Keep Your Hands Off Eizoken!) or bad (e.g., Assassins Pride) animation, but that is largely the extent of my evaluation.

One anime specific component that I do value highly is the audio, particularly voice acting. Compelling voice acting (e.g., Re:Zero, Toradora) and well-placed music (e.g., Re:Creators, Promare) can significantly elevate the watching experience. One thing that almost guarantees uprating from me is unique/distinct/quicky voice acting (e.g., Nobuhiko Okamoto, Satomi Arai).

A visual component in manga that I think is particularly important is page and panel architecture. Page/panel layout can and should be used to control pacing and expectations. (A couple of manga that I think do this well are Imperfect Girl and Citrus.) Haphazard layouts can lessen emotional impact, leave the reader confused/uncertain about the story's direction, and/or just create a mediocre experience. I like it when the layout gives me the impression that the author knows where they are going.

I want to expand a bit on my earlier point about using visuals to communicate experience, specifically as it relates to manga. (This also applies to anime, but I don't think it's as critical.) Manga has limited room for text, so it's of vital importance that the visuals convey the experience of characters (and maybe other types of viewpoints) in a compelling manner. There isn't room to explain in text things like the exact nature of a person's grief in learning that their best friend committed suicide, or what it feels like to go outside in a rural Japanese village during winter. I think doing this well goes a long way in creating an immersive story, and I rate accordingly.


Narrative Efficacy

Narrative efficacy can be difficult to evaluate. A story can be incredibly nuanced, and it's unlikely anyone will notice all of it. Your judgement might vary widely depending on which pieces you do and do not understand. There are many different angles to come at this topic from. I am going to focus on what I think are probably the four most obvious/important: plot, pacing, worldbuilding, and characters.

There are a multitude of ways to create an interesting story, and having a good plot is one of them. I think a plot should contain sufficient depth so as to be interesting (this is largely subjective), and progress in a logical manner. I often favor unconventional, creative, and/or transgressive plots, although that doesn't guarantee a high score. I also like recurring themes. I think they make a story more compelling and/or interesting (e.g., romantic bonds in Darling in the Franxx).

Pacing should follow a pleasant ebb and flow, modulating intensity and tranquility. A story needs to have downtime between moments of intensity so the audience can recover mentally/emotionally. Having lulls also helps make intense moments more impactful (via buildup). I think My Boy is a good example of this done well. The range of acceptable pacing will vary depending on the type of story. That said, static pacing typically leaves me feeling confused (too fast) or bored (too slow).

I think worldbuilding is an often-underexplored idea. The story world exists apart from the plot and characters, and as such needs specific consideration and attention. Constructing an adequate world helps establish the tone of the story, as well as set audience expectations (i.e., what is possible). On that note, one thing I come down hard on are contradictions (e.g., A Certain Magical Index and Akudama Drive). If a world has established rules, they should be followed. Any deviations should have sufficient explanation. Obvious failures in this regard immediately shatter my suspension of disbelief.

Characters are the most important element for me in this category. I like multifaceted characters with significant depth. I like characters that grow over the course of a story. I like complex relationships between characters. Main characters should be memorable and support characters should be functional. A couple examples of stories I think fulfill these requirements are Toradora (anime) and The Flowers of Evil (manga).


Personal Enjoyment

Now for the last evaluation criteria: personal enjoyment. While my predilections undoubtedly color every element of my evaluation, I don't explicitly weight heavily in favor of my enjoyment. In fact, sometimes I end up downrating stories after the emotional high wears off. I think of a rating as a primarily qualitative assessment.


Criteria Weighting

I don't have a hard and fast rule for weighting different evaluation criteria. I try to consider a work of art's strengths and weaknesses. If a work has a compelling story, but only passable art, I might still rate that story highly. Same for the reverse. A good example for me is the Kakegurui manga. The story and characters are mediocre (although the premise is interesting), but the art is some of the best I've ever seen in manga. For that reason, I recommend it to others and generally speak favorably of it.

Expanding on my previous point, I think it's important to consider an artist's perceived intent as best you can. I like to compare what I think the work was trying to be versus what it ended up being. There are definitely lines to be drawn, but offering a modicum of sympathy for a botched execution is sometimes warranted (e.g., Kiznaiver).

Another thing to consider for criteria weighting is genre. Different types of stories will have various criteria weighted differently. I don't expect the same things from a comedy as I do from a drama.