@ashnazg: Ah, that's where we come to the distinction of what it means to dismiss something out-of-hand
, and if you provide well-reasoned or sufficiently flexible subjective points detailing why, it can hardly be spoken of as perfunctory.
This also brings us to the point of whether said dismissal is public or private. If you feel that something is simply bad, based on a gut feeling, there's no shame in that. Mind you, however, that this is only applicable is said dismissal is private
, or done without the intention of swaying opinion. If you were to proclaim in a critical area something as inane as "this show is bad because I say so," or even "this show is bad because everyone says it's the best when it clearly isn't," you have indeed transgressed most direly against the realm of wisdom, good sense, and intelligent discourse.
If you want legitimate
criticisms to mull over, look no further than the (generic) "this show is incapable of developing good female characters," or "this show squanders potential due to technical incompetence." Even then, to stand as a sound critique these points must be properly weighted against other aspects of the work in question, especially those that worked well. That is to say: if you dismiss a show because it has pacing issues while ignoring all other aspects, that criticism is invalid and even your motives may be suspect, depending on the manner and earnestness of its delivery.