I feel better after puking all day Saturday! So it's time to write on frivolous topics. It seems that Fancy Lala has been getting a lot of attention from Anime News Network lately. Within the last week, volumes 2 and 3have been reviewed, and volume 5 has been given a good mention in the Shelf Life column. I would like to note that while volume one and two's reviews are in ANN's tradition of actually reviewing the show, pointing out the good points and the bad points without resorting to the LOLOL it's soooo kyute and funni style of anime reviews prevalent on the web, the volume three review seems a bit skimpy.
Although any excuse to mention Fancy Lala in this blog is a good one, I will use it as a jumping off point to explore the idea of a critic's darling anime. Anime is a very fan orientated hobby. Most anime critics (save for regular movie critics that only review theatrically released anime) are just anime fans who set up a website and let their ideas rip. Obviously, it does not take any training in criticism or writing to just set up a website, so much of the time, we have gotten reviews like this.(they seem to get worse as you go down)
The favorite shows of the reviewers tended to (and still tend to be) the mass market fan favorites. If the hot new show was Hot High School Chick Fighter Tits, that was what got the good reviews, and the attention, unlike movie reviewers who tend to focus more on the Oscar Contending Star Power Pic or the Obscure Indie. Then again, movies have a whole criticism culture built up around them.
For example, Ebert is a household name, and there are lots of classes in film criticism. While there are plenty of just set up a website critics, at least they have print critics as role models. There's also not much incentive to be a good anime critic. Very few people in anime fandom really care if you go beyond kyute and funni, and frankly, that's less effort.