Mana's review of Chobits

[ZZalapski]

I agree with Mana on Chobits' shortcomings: the pedestrian characterization, the recap episodes, and, most egregiously, how an interesting premise was undermined by an utterly flat plot -- I really thought the story was going to take off when the prep school teacher's dilemma with her persocom-addicted husband was mentioned, but CLAMP totally whiffed on that one. (I also didn't care for the sexist undertones and how it killed off two characters from Angelic Layer. What'd they do that for?) This is a series that I've liked less as time passed.

I guess I disagree with how much it sucked. 48%? Or to put it another way, less than halfway to perfection? I didn't think it was that bad, but, being mindful of the sticky on disagreeing with AA staff reviews, I won't dwell on it.

I am interested, though, in Mana's opinion of Hand Maid May relative to Chobits, since the two share many characteristics: boring male protagonist inexplicably receiving attention from women, main female robot with limited affect that becomes the romantic interest, kawaii mascot, even a post-series special that can be considered superior to the series itself. The one major difference is that Hand Maid May doesn't have the potential Chobits did, because it never aimed for such heights to begin with. I would say the two are roughly equal in their mediocrity, but I'd like to know what Mana thinks.

[Mana]

Part of the reason I graded Chobits so low was because of the wasted potential. In my personal opinion, it is much worse to watch something with promise fall flat on it's ass than to watch something that's horrible to begin with.

As far as the actual numbers go, well, I will admit that I have a hard time assigning a numerical value to my reviews. Normally, what I do is think of a ballpark value and then inspect other shows around that value in our library to help me firm up a number. I fully believe that Chobits belongs in the dredges of the library along with such wonderful classics as Peach Girl and Onegai Twins, and so that's how I assigned my numbering.

I've never actually seen any of Hand Maid May, though, so I can't offer any opinion on that ^^; I think I walked in on it at a con once and walked straight back out.

Personally, I love getting feedback and questions about my reviews, negative or positive. So don't feel back about asking ^^

[ZZalapski]

Thanks for the response, Mana. Given your past experience, it probably wouldn't be worth your time to watch Hand Maid May, even if it is only 11 episodes long. I'd suggest it only if:

a) you want to fully appreciate the comedic value of a robotic squid;
b) you want to catch the performances of a few of the well-known seiyuu, including Yuji Ueda and Kikuko Inoue; and/or
c) you feel like watching anime while drunk.

(BTW, what happened to the links where you can see what titles each AA prof has reviewed?)

[Mana]

a) you want to fully appreciate the comedic value of a robotic squid;

I'm sold. :D

I don't remember ever having a professor-listing feature like that, though. If we did, I'd assume it was probably before the main page redesign, since I don't think it was something that would be just taken out. It would be nice, though ^_^

[ZZalapski]

I'm sold. :D

Don't ban me if the resulting six hours makes you hate anime forever. I mean, it's not that bad, but I did warn you of its shortcomings. :-)

(must...resist...joke...involving...tentacles...)

I don't remember ever having a professor-listing feature like that, though. If we did, I'd assume it was probably before the main page redesign, since I don't think it was something that would be just taken out. It would be nice, though ^_^

IIRC, when you clicked on each prof's avatar to get his/her Top 10 lists, if you click on the avatar on that page, you can call up the list of animes that he/she has reviewed.

[Kei]

I'd like to point out that when I reviewed that, I was 19 and robot girls were pretty cool back then.

That is all.

[A-R@D]

I'd like to point out that when I reviewed that, I was 19 and robot girls were pretty cool back then.

That is all.

lol.
Yeah, being 20 year old male, I still kind of get that point of view. I'd imagine it would be a different experience all together to watch Chobits as a 21 y/o female.

[ZZalapski]

I'd like to point out that when I reviewed that, I was 19 and robot girls were pretty cool back then.

That is all.

What grade would you give it now, if I may ask?

[Kei]

60's-ish. I've said to a few people before: If I had the time to re-write and re-grade all of my old reviews, I would. Most of them would be far lower scores.

[fugupinkeye]

60's-ish. I've said to a few people before: If I had the time to re-write and re-grade all of my old reviews, I would. Most of them would be far lower scores.

I have noticed something about the library lately. Comparing the scale used by the long standing Professors like Kei, and Looking at the reviews of the newer professors, the idea of what constitutes 'good' seems to have changed. a %70 review score when this place was new seems to equate to about a %50 now. Used to be, anything below a %60 was utter trash, like "M.G.Geist", or "ninja Ressurection". Now below %60 seems to mean 'not bad-mediocre', like 'chobits, or 'Honey and Clover'.

Not that one set of meanings is any worse or better than the other, but i get the feeling that we are going to have to get used to %40 being the new %70 before to much longer.

[Illjwamh]

IIRC, when you clicked on each prof's avatar to get his/her Top 10 lists, if you click on the avatar on that page, you can call up the list of animes that he/she has reviewed.

The option is still there, you just get to it differently. From the main page, select the "Library" dropdown menu, and select "Sort By Professor".

For example, here's a page listing Mana's reviews:

http://www.animeacademy.com/libmana.php

[KiraraKim]

I did not see the anime but I tried to read the first volume of Chobits and couldn't get through it. Everyone has their own tastes I guess.

Now below %60 seems to mean 'not bad-mediocre', like 'chobits, or 'Honey and Clover'.

Well most of the reviews of Honey and Clover are pretty high except one. You can say it is the same with Chobits too. I don't think it shows that an anime is excellent or mediocre or horrible. It just shows that a review is just an opinion and even the professors' opinions can differ.

And I totally disagree with the 56% review of Honey and Clover but that is another matter entirely. :)

[Mana]

I'd imagine it would be a different experience all together to watch Chobits as a 21 y/o female.

While I wasn't as harsh with Chobits back in the day, I didn't care for it all that much the first time I watched it, too. It just managed to age terribly, and as I was rewatching it, things seemed to get worse.

[ZZalapski]

This is a ways off in the future, but maybe for AA's next milestone year (10th?), as many profs as possible, past and present, can participate in a lecture wherein they revisit a review that they feel has diverged the most since then. It'll be interesting to see how tastes change with time and maturation. (Well, it'll make us all feel like old farts, too.)

[Illjwamh]

That sounds like a cool idea.

I also think it would be cool if a prof were to re-review a title they've already done, and post it up without removing the original review. We could see two opinions and critiques from the same person, allowing us not only to see how their tastes evolve over time, but gain insight into the anime's "replay value".

[7Raven7]

Maybe, while I know a person's tastes may change, it is hard to think an objective review is going to differ much. I can imagine myself five years from now liking titles like Escaflowne or Now and Then, Here and There more than I do now (not big favorites of mine) however the critique highs and lows would probably stay the same.

[KiraraKim]

Maybe, while I know a person's tastes may change, it is hard to think an objective review is going to differ much. I can imagine myself five years from now liking titles like Escaflowne or Now and Then, Here and There more than I do now (not big favorites of mine) however the critique highs and lows would probably stay the same.

My tastes have changed over time but I tend to still enjoy older series I liked. Though a lot of times its more out of a sense of nostalgia.

Although it's been a few years since I first saw Escaflowne and I still love it. :p

[Taleweaver]

I'd still like to remind everybody of our grading scale:

100%: The perfect anime.

90% to 99%: The best of the best. These special anime have been deemed to be head and shoulders above the rest.

80% to 89%: Great anime in their own right, they have either a few small flaws or one large flaw that prevents them from attaining the next tier.

70% to 79%: These anime are just good. A nice addition to any collection, but not particularly memorable.

60% to 69%: Anime that earn these scores reside in that hazy, gray area called mediocrity. They have qualities and detriments in equal proportions.

50% to 59%: These works teeter on the precipice of forgettable. Inconsistent, with perhaps a few redeeming moments.

49% and below: Differing degrees of suckiness. The farther it can be tossed out the window is the determining factor.
In the AA grading scale, "utter trash" starts at 49% and below. So Kei would nowadays rate Chobits a mediocre series, whereas Mana, plain and simple, thinks it sucks. It doesn't suck as bad as, say, M.D. Geist, but it's pretty much below anything she can find entertaining. And that's pretty much what her review suggests.