I disagree. The description seems to be trying very hard to beat it into readers' heads that these works are usually misjudged - that might be excessive in and of itself, but it's very
jarring when you compare that to the general tone of the examples, which is much more evenhanded. I could buy a similar approach in the description, but as it stands there's only one sentence (the one about Squick
) that even remotely sounds like it's not going down the "audiences should look past the premise" route.