A Quick Tip by RabidChihuahua

Exactly. Why can't critics have a consistent basis for rating stuff? Aside from Solomon's clashing opinions, just like Ebert, he tends to praise animated titles that are deemed "classic" by legions of people just to fit in with the status quo (such as Tenchi Muyo). This is so because if you look at some of the reviews, he'll disregard the flaws in them in which he otherwise wouldn't for titles that don't have large fanbases.

Oh I fully agree that there's just too much crap out there these days. And I know that you are a harsh critic, but you know, I respect that because you're also fair and consistant. Personally speaking, I hardly ever pay attention to the professional critics. Whenever I have I've been disappointed. I didn't mean I love everything I watch because I don't, but I do my best to consider the whole thing (unless it's something awful from the get go, like Mouse ^^).  Granted I focus a lot on the characters and I do tend to over look things if I like the characters, but still, I try to be fair and objective. There isn't really anything that blows me away anymore, but I do enjoy watching anime over all.  It's good for me because my weekends are very long and a 120 minute DVD is a good way to help me pass the time while I have my luch.   And so it does get under my skin when he tears into one of my favorites with what I usually feel is an unfair bias. Familiar of Zero is far from perfect, same goes for Kaze no Stigma, but I don't recall he ever mentioned one good thing about either, only commenting about how annoying the female main characters were (which would have been fair if he didn't sound like he was talking about an ex-wife or ex girlfriend), and how stupid the plots are.