The Review Process

Reviews of art are so personal, so shaped by our own life experiences and perceptual skills, that objectivity is a chimera. At best, we can achieve a sort of "perfect subjectivity" guided by a set of criteria.

We use a 4 moon review system here at Moonshrimps. This provides a very rough shorthand for the quality of a work. Ideally, the moon rankings would have a Gaussian distribution, with most scores falling in the middle, but we don't typically engage with the full spectrum of arts in a given year.

The categories are as follows:

4 - Sublime. Achieves almost all of what it attempts at the highest level. More importantly, something about it makes it truly special.

3 1/2 - Excellent. Only minor faults. Among the best of a given year.

3 - Good. A solid experience. Worth it, if you have the time and money.

2 1/2 - Promising. Aspects are interesting or memorable. Something holds it back from a full recommendation.

2 - Middling. Not especially bad, nor especially good. Mostly forgettable.

1 1/2 - Poor. The negative outweighs the positive.

1 - Terrible. Few redeemable qualities.

Points of Consideration (POCs)

All critics of art have guiding criteria, whether or not they're aware of them or explicitly state them. The following Points of Consideration are used as a guide by Moonshrimps reviewers. Not all points apply to all forms of art, and there is some overlap, with all points feeding into the most important POCs at the top.

Impact

-Emotional and intellectual. The best art has both. Does it entertain you, charm you, touch you, or make you ask any bigger questions about humanity, society, or even the universe as a whole? Does it resonate with you? Is it thoughtful?

Creativity

-Has it been done before? Have we been in this world before? Is it unique? Does it feel fresh at all, when compared to other works? Does it have its own personality?

Variety

-It's the spice of life. Who wants to experience the same effect over and over? Even most minimalist works in music and film develop over time, and eventually take you different places.

Aesthetics

-Are the images and music and sound indelible? Do they bring the world to life? Aesthetics is being used here in a bit of a broader sense than normal.

Writing

-Is it sharp and memorable, with a high degree of craftsmanship? Is the dialogue naturalistic, if applicable? Are character motivations and plot elements logical and compelling? Does it have a clear structure?

Performances

-Are they fully realized? Do they bring the characters to life through believability and authenticity? Are they memorable?

Pacing

-Does it keep your attention, with well-timed effects and dramatic contour? Or does it feel flat or drawn-out? Does it respect your time? Is the tone well-sustained, when it needs to be?

Risk

-Is it more difficult to achieve what it attempts when compared to others? What are the layered demands -- narratively, conceptually, and otherwise?

Technical Achievement

-Achieved scope and complexity of the mechanistic components. Smoothness of gameplay and presentation, if applicable.

Value

-We live in a society where art isn't free -- nor should it be! But not all of it costs the same. So, one must ask, upon release, is the work more or less expensive than other contemporary works of comparable artistic achievement, within the same medium?