Like any other animal, film critics stalk their territory in all stripes and colors.
Each reviewer has their own educational background, wide-range of eclectic tastes and aesthetic influences, prejudices.
It's a given...one writer may vote thumbs up on a blockbuster or Indy film, another down.
On occasion, a wide-release is such an obvious piece of **it, that it's panned all across the board.
On occasion, a reviewer may cite another critic - give them the nod as a matter of professional courtesy - because they've made an astute observation.
And, often quote a specific analysis - to contrast with their own opinion - just maybe, to give balance to the playing field.
This past week, a critic took a nasty swipe at his peers because the lot of 'em knocked a big-budget film he had fond musings about.
Heh man, there are myriad points of view - all valid, worthwhile takes on things; trying to silence a voice because it's not in accord with yours crying out from the wilderness - is unprofessional, in poor taste.
The film critic in question is a hypocrite in my opinion; go figure, the lad pens for a counter-culture newspaper that has become that which they once hated most.
What is the role of the film critic?
According to the Boston Globe,
"A film critic's manifesto takes directors down a peg, puts writers on top, and turns Hollywood on its head."
Obviously, the lament was made tongue-in-cheek!
Leading critic Clive Barnes noted from his perspective,
"One of the difficulties of criticism is that you are remote from the people you're criticizing for. You are probably more sophisticated than your average reader. You've certainly seen more than your average reader. Just the same as the ballet master or the choreographer doesn't represent the audience any more. So you do have to be very careful that you're not adopting too elitist a view, or be aware when you are adopting an elitist view."
In my opinion, a critique should be a thoughtful, intelligent analysis of the key elements of a film, to determine the aesthetic value on a multitude of artistic levels.
Ultimately, the film critic is a guiding light for the filmgoer...
Reviews spark lively debate, Sir - put a spotlight on a film - and on occasion have the potential to launch obscure little gems into mega-hit status.
Do filmgoers really listen to critics?
In recent months, a handful of major films garnered rave critiques, yet - they bombed at the box office.
The filmgoing public are prone to scan a review for a quick synopsis, a slant on the release, whatever.
But, it's generally the buzz or word-of-mouth that gets 'em into the movie houses.
If critics and producers could second-guess the movie-going public, less films would be taking a dive on opening weekend.
At this juncture, it's obvious you're out of your league, fella.
Poor baby!
Critic
Webster's definition
Main Entry: 1crit•ic
Pronunciation: 'kri-tik
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin criticus, from Greek kritikos, from kritikos able to discern or judge, from krinein
1 a : one who expresses a reasoned opinion on any matter especially involving a judgment of its value, truth, righteousness, beauty, or technique b : one who engages often professionally in the analysis, evaluation, or appreciation of works of art or artistic performances
2 : one given to harsh or captious judgment
No comments:
Post a Comment