People who try to be "objective" when rating anime, what is the objective or goal of anime?

Icetype said:
It's impossible to be 100% objective because even if someone has a set list of criterias, it will still be up to the person's opinions on if those criterias were met. Things like what proper animation quality and character development looks like is subjective to just about everyone

Shakjoe said:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/objective

Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased.

Was that so hard to do that I had to do it for you?

fluffycow17 said:

I know that. I was wondering how people try to be objective (like which criteria they are using). There aren't many people who claim to be 100% objective.

Icetype said:

heres an example of one https://sasrnook.com/rating-scheme/

Icetype said:
It's impossible to be 100% objective because even if someone has a set list of criterias, it will still be up to the person's opinions on if those criterias were met. Things like what proper animation quality and character development looks like is subjective to just about everyone

Icetype said:

heres an example of one https://sasrnook.com/rating-scheme/

ohohohohohoho said:
most people seem to be missing your point in this thread.

i don't believe anime has, nor needs to have a specific, universal objective myself, and i also don't believe in humans being capable of objectivity when it comes to evaluating art (or most things).

from my observations, most people around here seem to believe that the only objective of anime is to be entertaining, so they evaluate it based on how entertaining it is. but of course... whether it's entertaining to you or not, depends largely on YOU (a conscious subject) and your reception of the material in the first place. what is it that entertains you, and why? there aren't simply things that ARE entertaining, to everyone, and things that aren't. also, is it entertaining because of the content itself, or for some other reason? is it entertaining because it is a spectacular failure? and so on.

you can decide that the goal of an anime is x. perhaps x is "to entertain." does it succeed in entertaining? does it do it on purpose? purely through its own content? or is it because you like shipping characters or because it's a tie in to something else or you're interested in the history or development of a particular artist or art style? to me it seems a bit unfair to rate an anime poorly because it fails to be entertaining when that is not the point of a particular work in the first place, but that's the only thing most people care about around here because it's PRESUMED to be the point all of the time. if that isn't the creator's ostensible intention, then the creator must be a troll or a pseudointellectual or something.

what if the objective is to make a particular political point, to teach, to express a feeling, to examine some event or idea thoroughly, or anything else? you have to change your criteria. the criteria and how well the piece lives up to the criteria is up to you to decide.

King_KK said:
Rating objectively is just not possible. Almost everybody rates a show based on enjoyment, weather they like to admit it or not and since enjoyment is in itself subjective so no rating can ever be objective. Enjoyment of a show depends more on the person than the show itself. A persons moral values, his beliefs and his view on what constitutes a good story are gonna shape his enjoyment of a particular show.

I believe people who claim that they rate "objectively" are just better at explaining about why they like or dislike a certain show and have a greater understanding of what elements make a show good in their opinion rather than people who rate subjectively. People who claim they rate just on enjoyment are just not good at understanding their own taste and can't explain what elements the show had that made it appealing to them.

Overall, I would say that people should try to have a better understanding of what they like and dislike in a work of fiction and rate shows based on it rather than worrying about meaningless buzzwords like subjectivity or objectivity.

Apolygon2 said:



it is impossible to be fully objective, but saying having any amount of objectivity is impossible is just not true.

I can very easily (mostly) separate enjoyment from quality.

there are more than a few 4, 5 or 6/10 shows that I have enjoyed way more than some of my 8 and 9s.

everyone will always have some biased, but you can get closer than most to being objective if you actually try. although you do HAVE to look at stuff from other peoples perspective as well. having a tunnel vision is the last thing you want when trying to be objective.

Nirinbo said:
Rating objectively = overrating thought provoking anime & underrating dumb fun ones

King_KK said:


If you have shows that you rated a 4 that you consider more entertaining and enjoyable than a show you rated a 9 than you don't understand your taste in fiction to begin with. Anime is an entertainment medium and isn't the main purpose of the entertainment industry to entertain it's viewers to begin with. If one show is more entertaining to you than the other than how do you decide weather the other show is "objectively" better. It doesn't make any sense to me. In my opinion objectively good fiction just does not exist.

I am really interested in knowing what "objective qualities" makes you consider that a show that you think deserves a 4 but you enjoyed more is better than some show you think deserves a 9 but you enjoyed less. Like what even quantifies an objectively good show? Is it the characters, the animation or the plot, if it is either than explain to me what is an objectively good character or an objectively good plot? I believe that at the end of the day what you like and what you consider to be good is gonna be subjective no matter what.

Gsarthotegga said:


This perspective is alien to me. I mean... most people who love Natsume Soseki novels will probably have more immediate enjoyment from watching a Jackie Chan film. That doesn't mean they would rate the Jackie Chan film higher. Why a person likes something can be quite nuanced, and to just narrow it down to muh entertainment is rather shallow. Like would you consider a film like Irreversible especially enjoyable? I don't think most people would, and it's actually meant to be alienating in many ways—just look at the camera work; still, it's a film that offers a unique experience, and that novelty or other artistic qualities may have a person rating it higher than some shoot 'em up John Woo film. You seem to think because it's from the "entertainment industry" that entertainment is the only important thing, but even this industry produces the occasional art film, which is presumably less entertaining, and yet these films are often applauded.

King_KK said:

I personally would not rate a film high no matter how well made it is if I am not enjoying it. It might seem alien perspective to you but that's just how I consume and analyse fiction. What good is good cinematography or artistic qualities if they can't produce a good experience for the viewer. A movie like that failed as a piece of fiction in my eyes and I wouldn't rate it high, no matter what.

People just like to delude themselves thinking just because a snooze fest of a movie has some symbolic, artsy stuff in it , it turns into a good movie. A movie needs to be entertaining to be good.

Scavendgarr said:
Why people have to ask something so obvious? The objective of the production of entertainment industry is to gain profit from their product. The answer apparently is to making many isekai harem anime.

I feel dumb have to explain something so trivial like this.

Gsarthotegga said:


Well, that's the primary goal for studios, but it's actually not always the primary motivation for the artist. It's not unheard of for creators to make passion projects that they believe won't make money or to fund it themselves—it's just not many of these are made because profit is the primary motivation of the industry, and projects like that take serious passion and resources. Sometimes there's a compromise to balance profit and artistry to make something that bucks the trend but doesn't completely tank.

I don't think OP and most others in the thread were talking about it from the perspective of the entertainment industry, though.

King_KK said:


If you have shows that you rated a 4 that you consider more entertaining and enjoyable than a show you rated a 9 than you don't understand your taste in fiction to begin with. Anime is an entertainment medium and isn't the main purpose of the entertainment industry to entertain it's viewers to begin with. If one show is more entertaining to you than the other than how do you decide weather the other show is "objectively" better. It doesn't make any sense to me. In my opinion objectively good fiction just does not exist.

I am really interested in knowing what "objective qualities" makes you consider that a show that you think deserves a 4 but you enjoyed more is better than some show you think deserves a 9 but you enjoyed less. Like what even quantifies an objectively good show? Is it the characters, the animation or the plot, if it is either than explain to me what is an objectively good character or an objectively good plot? I believe that at the end of the day what you like and what you consider to be good is gonna be subjective no matter what.

Gsarthotegga said:


Hahaha. Perhaps so. That definitely happens quite a bit from what I've seen with critics. I try to keep a balance.

CyborgSaber said:
You can't rate objectively because everyone rates differently and I never understood the point of trying to be objective either when rating anime who cares. Normally these people are trying to hard and just look pretentious to me.

Scavendgarr said:


Wdym? Can you give me a few example of this passion project you talking about? I'm sincerely asking here since I'm curious.

A project that being commercialized is a business project, not passion project. I cannot believe it's someone passion to make a story about some teenager get transferred to another world and start making a harem.

PaantsuSaamaa said:
There´s no such thing as an "objective" rating. Because the way I view it, an "objective" answer means that there´s no other answer, while a "subjective" answer means that there´s different answers depending on the person.

Therefore, stating that your answer is the correctly "objective" one would just make you sound egotistical and a little bit elitist.

Apolygon2 said:





alright I'll give you an example,


shinsekai yori, a show that I consider to be a high 8.

it's a slow burner that has a good amount of info dumps, there isn't really many flashy action scenes, and the characters are all pretty much act like normal humans, so they aren't really too interesting.

BUT, on the other hand, the show has an extremely interesting world, a satisfying answer to every question, a layer of philosophy that truly makes you think, multiple breath taking scenes and twists, that were only as impactful as they were because of the build up, so many cool and interesting ideas, tragedies, and dramatic moments.

during the time I was watching it, I was more bored that I was not, but I look back at it as a fantastic show with very few flaws.


now let's compare that to something like darling in the franxx. a complete train reck. the character motivations were dumb, the drama was cheap, it was aimless, it lacked originality, and had one of the most laughably bad endings in fiction.

but I enjoyed the hell out of it.

the ending was fucking abysmal but in the most entertaining possible way. the drama was cheap, but it was spicy so It was entertaining. the story was aimless, but it made it unpredictable.

every one of those problems made the show more entertaining.


I can even use more extreme examples.


ex arm is a failed piece through and through, one of the worst anime ever created, but it's way more entertaining than serial experiments lain, which is a show that many consider to be a masterpiece.

anime and media in general, is more than just mindless entertainment.

shows can evoke many different emotions, they can tackle philosophical topics, the can be motivating, they can inspire, they can teach, hell they can change someone's life or give it a new perspective.

yes my hero academia was more enjoyable than end of evangelion.

yes I had a more fun time with baki than I had with odd taxi.

yes redo of healer is far more entertaining than ghost in the shell.

but none of that matters when it comes to quality.

not every shows' goal is entertainment. and your misconception is just that. some want to make you think. some want to make you cry. some want to make you learn. some want to make worry. and so on and so on.

King_KK said:

So basically your argument boils down to the fact that you enjoy shows that you know are poorly made and are pretty trashy. I guess, I just can't relate to you because I can't enjoy media that I know is bad or poorly made. The entire idea of shows that are so bad that they become good is pretty alien to me. I need the show to have good writing and good production values for me to enjoy it. I guess to each their own. Still it is you who is analysing each show you watch to find out what show is well written and what's not so it's still subjectivity in my eyes. It would be objectivity if there was some scientific metric to test weather Shinsekai Yori is more well written the Darling in the Franxx or not. But alas there's not.

As for your last paragraph, shows wanting to make me feel a certain way or making me think and succeeding in it is entertainment in my eyes.

Gsarthotegga said:


I don't know enough about the anime industry to give too many examples, but with independent films, it is often the case that the artists are trying to make a name for themselves and build up a resume. Like it's definitely not the top choice if you want to make money. Some of them end up being very profitable, but that does not apply to most. It's not uncommon for filmmakers to do a lot of side projects to be able to afford to make their art. Studio 4C had so many artsy productions that they might be the equivalent of this. I assume most of their money comes from assisting other studios rather than the various short art projects they created.

The anime movie Redline was a pretty huge risk. It wasn't the same kind of production disaster as Heaven's Gate was for Hollywood. It ate up a huge amount of money and made hardly any of it back and killed Cimino's career. Of course, the studio wants to make money, but Cimino was far more concerned with artistry and made so many ridiculous choices in the name of perfectionism that you'd have to come to the conclusion that this guy either thought he was too big to fail or was oblivious. So looking it up, that cost 44 million and made back 3.5 million! Not accounting for inflation. Now, I don't know what Cimino thought going in. All artists hope to break even or make money (maybe not Hiroshi Harada lol), but sometimes their vision is more important to them. The film does have beautiful cinematography, but it was a little obtuse for most filmgoers, I suppose. It was also heavily edited and cut. This is the most famous example of a flop in film history.

So back to Redline, from a quick look, I see 26 million cost and only making 8 million in sales and so needless to say it was a big flop (though a nice film, even if more focused on style over substance). Not sure how accurate these numbers are now. But this was a production they worked on for years, and they would put way more attention to detail when it came to animation than they necessarily needed to if the main concern was money. If you were purely focused on money, in fact, you'd want to take a model more like a lot of shounen. Lots of animation saving techniques, then bring in some solid key animation for pivotal scenes. Doesn't need to be hugely time or money-intensive like Redline.

Losses in profit are not always as much of an issue with business as people tend to think, btw, depending on the business model and the industry. Especially if there is some way to offset a loss. Like if we're talking about an anime studio, they might have 5 money makers, and another one for artistic purposes that may not sell well; obviously, they want it to sell, but it's a greater gamble than like a popular isekai or shounen. I've heard rumors about various creators in the industry saying the industry has shifted in a way where it's not really possible to make productions similar to Lain or Texhnolyze anymore, implying they were a risk in the first place, and that it would be an even greater risk now or difficult to get greenlit. That's probably correct, since we don't tend to see very many similar anime lately. I feel Sonny Boy is similar in this regard, and I doubt that was expected to be profitable.

(Speaking of money not always being the most important, you'd have to consider news media—a lot of news outlets are part of a parent company, and either the propaganda is more important than the profit, or the owner is recouping the losses from other outlets or businesses.)