I'm reminded of how Roger Ebert once said he tried to review movies. He doesn't approach it from the "this type of movie is good or bad" angle, but rather "if you like this type of movie, is this a good or bad example of that type".

So, let's say you have a movie that's basically just an excuse to hang a lot of special effects, explosions, and fight scenes together. He's not going to judge or review it the way or by the criteria he'd use to review Schindler's List or the latest Woody Allen film, but rather by criteria appropriate for a shoot 'em up FX film. I think that's a reasonable approach to take to written works as well.