Harley Quinn Exclusive Premium Format Figure by Sideshow Collectibles

[StatueHunter75]

Here's a video review of my new Harley Quinn Exclusive Premium Format Figure by Sideshow Collectibles. Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctX8fC0bGTE

[Shanesg]

Cool vid as usual, but I feel like you should become a little more critical with your reviews. It's great that you think everything is awesome. For the most part I do too . It just doesn't work that well for reviews. What's a 10 mean if everything is a 10?

[StatueHunter75]

I hear ya Shanesg I just like what I buy that's the fough thing. :)

[Bmutha]

I can sympathize...I only buy stuff that I think looks awesome, so it's tough to find reasons to hand out lower scores or rip on something you just spent your hard-earned money on.

Anyways, great review.

[COI]

This is an inherent problem with reviewing statues. Unlike movies, tv shows, games, etc... actually getting a piece in-hand to review requires an investment, and no one is going to lay out cash for a piece they're not expecting to like. So we're all going in with a more optimistic bias, and although every statue is bound to have some sort of flaw, if you're psyched about a piece you've been anticipating for a long time, it can be hard to get very critical.

The solution would be for individual reviewers to have a relatively strict scale, where 9+ represents the best of the best, and where 5 or 6 is average. The problem with this, of course, is that people have gotten this idea from other media that anything below 8 is "bad".

In both the reviews I did, I got some criticism for scoring the pieces "low" (Green Lantern PF: 76%, Harley Quinn PF: 88%) when I think both pieces are really good. The criticism was that my glowing review didn't reflect the score, but in my mind a 6 is "average" which would make these pieces "very good" and "great" on my scale.

I guess there's no real solution other than for each reviewer to stay consistent with their own standards.

[JP Sarri]

This is an inherent problem with reviewing statues. Unlike movies, tv shows, games, etc... actually getting a piece in-hand to review requires an investment, and no one is going to lay out cash for a piece they're not expecting to like. So we're all going in with a more optimistic bias, and although every statue is bound to have some sort of flaw, if you're psyched about a piece you've been anticipating for a long time, it can be hard to get very critical.

The solution would be for individual reviewers to have a relatively strict scale, where 9+ represents the best of the best, and where 5 or 6 is average. The problem with this, of course, is that people have gotten this idea from other media that anything below 8 is "bad".

In both the reviews I did, I got some criticism for scoring the pieces "low" (Green Lantern PF: 76%, Harley Quinn PF: 88%) when I think both pieces are really good. The criticism was that my glowing review didn't reflect the score, but in my mind a 6 is "average" which would make these pieces "very good" and "great" on my scale.

I guess there's no real solution other than for each reviewer to stay consistent with their own standards.

I totally agree, COI. My solution to the problem is not to review things right away. I prefer to wait a couple of weeks, or maybe a Month or two. After the excitement and the first impression have simmered down, we tend to be a little more objective with our criticism. On the other hand, the problem with it, is that most consumers want to check out the reviews as soon as the items hit the market. In an expensive hobby like ours, time is money.

[risingstar]

This is an inherent problem with reviewing statues. Unlike movies, tv shows, games, etc... actually getting a piece in-hand to review requires an investment, and no one is going to lay out cash for a piece they're not expecting to like. So we're all going in with a more optimistic bias, and although every statue is bound to have some sort of flaw, if you're psyched about a piece you've been anticipating for a long time, it can be hard to get very critical.




If I may add, because reviews can sometimes take hours to put together, I doubt many people would be particularly inclined or motivated to spend that much time reviewing a statue they didn't like, unless they're paid to do so or had an axe to grind with that particular production company. Ultimately, reviews are labors of love. It should be fun. Also, reviews are generally intended to invite forum traffic and feedback. If people are going to review a dud or even an older obscure piece, the ensuing lukewarm response shouldn't be surprising. It's the nature of the beast. People want to see the new hot stuff.

I recently reviewed the DC cover girls Huntress statue and gave it an overall score of 6.25 (C-). The consensus was that it was a fair review. Then again, it's not like that piece was flying off the shelves. That particular review didn't get much traffic, at least not compared to some of my other reviews (e.g., Batman, Harley). That's not to say necessarily that reviewers are typically attention seekers, it's more to say that the greater number of hits and posts your review gets, the more encouraged you are to do more. Simply put, people are more inclined to do things that make them feel good, especially with their free personal time.