1. How do you use reviews to decide whether or not you want to buy/see something?
I used reviews once to decide to buy a certain DVD; turns out that was a bad idea. I try to see a movie or read a book before deciding to buy it.

I do use reviews to determine whether or not to see something; mostly just checking for extremely bad moral problems, though.

2. Do you ever read reviews of things you have already bought/seen? If so, why, and do they ever change your own opinion of that being reviewed?
I do read reviews of things already bought/seen; i guess because i like knowing what other people think. I love reading pluggedin's reviews of movies, even ones i haven't seen and will never see.

I don't think they've ever changed my opinion; at least not strongly.

3. Do you ever defy reviews, and see something that is low-rated or refuse to see something critically acclaimed? What makes you decide this?
I don't concern myself with whether something is 'critically acclaimed', for the most part. Whether or not i'll like something is so subjective, i don't think a review from someone else's perspective will help me decide if i want to see something or not.

4. Why do you write reviews? Do you write them for yourself, and if so, why? Do you write them for other people?
I mostly just write them for myself. I don't really know why; i guess it helps me organize my thoughts.

5. How do you "grade" reviews? What scale do you like to use (1-10, 1-5, A-B-C-D-F, etc.)? Do you like to review the work's individual elements or as a whole? Do you find yourself giving high scores more often, low scores more often, or a balance between the two?
I use 1-10 mostly. I generally review the film as a complete thing, as i find it hard to separate music/story/acting/directing/cinematography/what-have-you when i'm watching one.

I generally give very high scores or very low scores; mostly because those are the types of films that i feel like reviewing.

6. What would you consider a "good" review? What is important in a review?
A good review is one that agrees with me.

But seriously folks, i think a good review is one that is written after serious contemplation of the subject being reviewed, one that is organized in its presentation, and describes clearly why the reviewer has come to the opinions he/she has.

7. How important should reviews be in deciding whether something is "good" or not? Do you think people place too much importance on reviews?
It's definitely possible to say you could put too much importance on reviews, but i don't know how much importance they should have. As much as helps you decide, i guess. If you find yourself usually disagreeing with a particular reviewer, you probably shouldn't use them as a guide of what you should or should not see, and the reverse is the same.

(gives topic a 7/10)

This is a great thread!

I love reading and writing reviews. I use them to determine what I should expect going into a movie or reading a book. I tend to read throught many reviews and see what I can find that is consistant in them. If most of the reviews are saying that the acting was great I am inclined to believe that. If a few people say the characters were boring, I will be less likely to believe that.

I think reviews are entertaining to read, even if you have already watched the movie/read the book/ etc. Sometimes they are more fun to read than actually reading the book or watching the movie the review is about!
Its great to see different perspectives as well as people who agree with you. Sometimes they might change my perspective on certain aspects of a film, but they don't usually change how I feel about a film as a whole.

I need reviews to give reasons for why the reviewer feels a certain way about something. Its not enough to simply state how you feel without explaining yourself. Thats why the reviews (or "previews") for VDT aren't really influencing how I feel about the film. The people who write the the reviews can't back up their feelings as they can't give out spoilers.

Unless most if not all reviews are saying a movie is bad or unless there is Oscar buzz about a movie, reviews don't relly influence whetehr I will see a movie or not. Usually marketing, recommendations by friends, or curiosity is what brings me into a movie. Same goes fo books, musicals, etc.

I think reviews themselves are a form of entertainment.

Wow, what a pertinent thread for me. I've long been a reader of music reviews. For one, they're a great way to determine whether music is worth looking into or not. I found people whose opinions I trusted (they were similar to mine) and read them. Of course, our tastes differed at times, but if the album received a 1/5, I probably wouldn't check it out.
I had an opportunity about 8 months ago to become a contributing reviewer at www.thealbumproject.net, a website I already read.

I started out reading them to weed out duds and highlight bright albums, but reviews are also helpful for solidifying my own thoughts. If I agree with a reviewer, then they've just put my own thoughts/feelings into words. If I disagree, well now I can put my thoughts into words.

When I started writing reviews, it was for a number of reasons. I'm passionate about music and writing and I like seeing my name in "print." The website I write for is well-run and respected enough that we receive free, advance music to review, which is lovely for my bank account.

Becoming a "critic" is, however, something that requires some thought. Since Samuel Taylor Coleridge created literary criticism, the debate has existed about whether critics are of utmost importance (like Coleridge thought), little importance, or an abomination. There are moments when I feel guilty. I do not make music. I cannot. I don't have the talent. And yet I somehow feel that I have some sort of right to not only criticize those who do, but to make it available for others to read and influence their thoughts.

My philosophy is this: art is a subjective thing. No one can really decide whether something is worth watching/looking at/reading/listening to except the consumer themselves. It's pretty clear that Jonsi of Sigur Ros has more musical talent than John Vasoli of Secondhand Serenade, but some people like it. Reviews are really just expressions of the reviewer that, when published, enter the dialogue of whether art is valuable or not. It's one voice. And it's up to the reader to first off decide whether to listen and then, if they do, whether they agree.

As for ratings, the site I write for uses a 1-5 scale with no half scores. Most of the reviews I write waffle between 3 and 4. A near perfect album may merit a 5, but I'd say a good 60-70% end up with a 3. A 3 means, it's good, but it's not moving us forward, creating something new, or proving exceptional artistry.

Ok, so there's a really long response. I honestly hope no one read all that. Go read something productive. But reviewing is actually something I'm very interested in. May I ask Frank how this topic came about?

How did this topic come about... um, completely randomly?

Actually, this topic has sort of always been an interesting one to me, for various reasons. There's a surprising number of aspects to this topic, really.

For one thing, the scale. On one hand, I tend to use a 1-10 scale... however, I usually end up scoring things as 8's, 9's, and 10's (I have an awful lot of 10's), rarely give out 7's and 6's, and 5's and below are pretty much never seen. This sometimes leads me to find my scale somewhat faulty: it's as though the scale is really only a 4-point scale (something many actual reviewers are criticized for). In fact, one modified scale I sometimes use accounts for this: a 1-5 star scale, giving 5 stars for a 10/10, 4 for a 9/10, 3 for an 8/10, 2 for 7/10 or 6/10, and 1 for 5/10 and below.

I also have done the improper-fraction act of giving out 11/10's for those works which are the "best of the best". Because of this, when a review site's scale is out of 10, I'll deduct 1 point from "my" scale and count that as my score out of 10.

All that said, though, not being a professional critic and thus forced to review stuff I don't like, I don't think it's necessarily bad that most of my scores are high. Thus, the only way I would end up giving a bad score is if the work is something I thought I would like but thought wrong, and for whatever reason, did not quit before the point at which I could validly give a review. For the most part, that which I read/watch/play is that which I like... hence, most will get high scores.

(Which brings up another question: do you make sure only to review works you've finished, or do you review things before they are done or you don't plan to finish at times? I usually make sure I finish the work and skipped only a minimal amount of the stuff beforehand.)

When it comes to actually rating stuff, I run into trouble. I like to appreciate the various aspects in which a work can be "good", whether in story, humor, production, meaning, or sheer randomness. The reason why I love one work can be entirely different from the reason I love another work. And yet, I still have to rate both on the same, one-dimensinal 1-11 scale. How do I do that?

This is where I came up with a term I call "power". Basically, the "power" of a work is, quite simply, the degree to which the work has affected my life--the power it had to change my life.

Pretty high calling for any piece of work, isn't it? But then again, for me, at least... if a work hasn't affected my life in any significant way, it doesn't matter how well-produced it is, or even how well-written of a story it has: it is ultimately, to me, a waste of time. (Or at best, background noise for when I do my homework.) On the contrary, a certain work could have numerous places in both production and storytelling where it is lacking... but if it has somehow impacted my life, I can look past those deficiencies and look fondly on the work.

(And before someone asks: comedies can have power. Comedies can have huge power. There's a reason they say laughter is the best medicine, you know.)

Hence, I will sometimes call my ratings "power rankings". Rather than an expression of how good quality a work is, my ratings will be how much a work has affected me, personally.

Finally, speaking of reading others' reviews. I often do read reviews of works I've already seen, just for the self-satisfaction of finding people who agree with me. When they disagree... well, at that point, I can sometimes find out why I disagree, which can explain which aspects of a work I don't care about as much, or that I care about more than the reviewer.

There are some works that I have a pretty good idea that I'd like, and for those I don't worry much about others' reviews before buying (I might look at some good reviews to bolster my confidence, but that's it). Some stuff, though, I find more borderline on my judgment, and this is where a review really could make or break my judgment.

At this point, I have to read reviews carefully. One thing I've learned about myself is that my tastes are... weird. They're extremely wide-ranged, but at the same time will gravitate towards certain things and away from others. Hence, I have to see what the critics pan, and if what they pan is stuff I myself care about, while at the same time see what they praise, and if I actually like that kind of stuff.

It is in this sense, then, that a "good" review, in my opinion, needs to be sufficiently detailed (something many reviewers in some places aren't so good at) as to explain why they liked or didn't like what they liked or didn't like, so that those with different ways of thinking can evaluate for themselves whether they might like this kind of work. Of course, all this could lead to a certain reviewer who writes "good" reviews, but because his way of thinking is so completely different from mine, reading his reviews are of no help to me. But then again, that's not a bad thing; it's because his review is detailed that I know that his opinion isn't worth my consideration on the basis of different ways of thinking.

Anyways, those are my two cents... out of five.

I've learned that you cannot use reviews to determine the quality of a product. The truth is reviews are only opinions and many reviewers tend to be biased of what they review. As a videogamer I visit many sites that review games. Sometimes I highly agree with a review, other I do not. In fact I found myself trusting fan reviews more then professional reviews. Its kind of odd.

I think that the best to do is to try to determine how good the product is with your standards. If you are interesting in a videogame, book or movie instead of just watching the score you should pay attention of the overview. This can give you the right idea of what that videogame or book is about and whether you will like it or not. The problem is that some media is very expensive to buy, like videogames or movies. So I think that is very suitable to check a demo or the the trailers. And yet these can be misleading... Well, sometimes you have to take the risk. After all, sometimes you can find great jewels inside plastic boxes.

Well, if the majority of reviews are saying "This thing is total and complete crap!", I think the odds are good that you should listen to the reviews.

Well, if the majority of reviews are saying "This thing is total and complete crap!", I think the odds are good that you should listen to the reviews.

Except that soemtimes the majority is mistaken.

Most of the time I find the general consensus is correct — or I should say (for something subjective like art), in line with my own views. This isn't always the case, of course. But I am not so unique and special that my opinion consistently varies markedly from most other people's.

I write reviews of every book I read and have been doing so since July 2007. I post them at LibraryThing. I read reviews from other LTers when determining whether or not to purchase a book, and have found that there are several people there whose tastes are very like my own. I tend to trust their reviews much more than those of random posters there. It's interesting when I review a book and then read the other reviews on it, and find myself echoing someone else.

I've started to use LT more and more when I'm eyeing a book to buy. With limited funds, I'm not so willing to just buy something and hope it's good. For things like music and video games, I tend to read the worst reviews first. Sure, you get a lot of stupidity there, but the people giving the worst reviews tend to be a lot more honest than the fanboys/girls giving everything five star reviews.