You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
.
Last edited by Illinoisguy1 (12 Aug 09 :: 18:23)
Offline
Asking whether we "need" movie critics is kind of a difficult question. I wouldn't say they don't deserve to have a place in the entertainment world. Sometimes it can be really helpful if you're unsure of whether a certain movie will be "your thing" or not.
The way I see it is that in today's world of instant information availabitly (i.e. the internet), there are so many people out there who call themselves critics, that you're basically overfed with so-called movie critic websites. Anyone with the skill to set up a blog can call himself a movie critic now, you don't need media like newspapers, TV or radio anymore.
And the most important thing is still, and you already mentioned it, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some people will end up loving a movie to death that has been slaughtered by the critics, and some people will end up hating a movie that was praised to the heavens. I don't have anything against people who would rather go by the critics' word and then decide whether they wanna see a movie or not. I personally like to judge for myself after either seeing a trailer or reading a plot synopsis. I usually tend to stay away from reviews, at least until I've seen the movie myself.
-TeeJay
"Sometimes I think the human species is programmed to look at the bright side of every disaster."
-- David Sandström, ReGenesis
Offline
Need? No. But I do sometimes enjoy reading reviews of movies I particularly enjoyed AFTER I've already seen the movie and made up my own mind. And yes, the explosion of amateur critics that the Internet has created can be quite disconcerting. But I've found a few movie columnists that I share some common ground with and do like to read. Like Scott Mendelson on HuffPo. He's a good writer. I don't always agree with him, but the great thing is you can leave him comments that he actually reads and responds to.
I've always been a fan of Roger Ebert, ever since I was a kid watching Siskel & Ebert on PBS. I definitely don't always agree with Roger, but he's almost always entertaining.
I guess what I'm saying is that I do not use critics as a way to choose the movies I see. Oh, once in a while someone will talk up a movie I had no intention of seeing and it'll make me curious enough to check it out. But that's rare. Like I said, mostly I read them after the fact --- something that started with The Sixth Sense back in '99. I'd only been online for a year and I discovered the Movie Review Query Engine, a portal to almost every review on the web for any given movie. I read well over a hundred reviews of that film. Just couldn't get enough. And that still happens to me once in a while. I'll see something and really fall in love with it and just read everything everyone's saying about it. Most recently, My Sister's Keeper and before that, Knowing. Ebert was so taken with Knowing that he not only reviewed it, he blogged about it. It was fascinating.
Deb,
Your Fairy Chrismother. Keeper of Keith's leather wristband. Keeper of Pocket Anomalies. WWAJD?
REPORT BROKEN LINKS info@chris-marquette.com http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=ho … ef=profile
Wanna talk to President Obama? http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/ Close Gitmo/Open Cuba.
Offline
Need in a big sense...no, not really.
But I think they perform a real service to movie fans. Not in regards to major releases. We will all make up our own minds whether we want to see them or not. What critics do, is help small movies. The Little Miss Sunshines of the world. They bring attention to movies which are searching for a releasing company, and they can help movies which have a limited release, to be discovered by more people. They provide advertising for movies which aren't getting much advertising from the companies releasing them. there are wonderful movies which we may have never seen without the support of critics. Yes, there are wonderful movies which could have used their support, which didn't get it, so it isn't a perfect thing, But I think they serve a purpose, and I'm glad they are doing it.
Joan: So, my true nature is to be a catalyst? That is mad anti-climatic.
God: Anti climactic. Anti-climatic means you're against the weather.
Offline
Very good point, Rick. And very true. Lars & The Real Girl is one of those movies I might not've discovered if there wasn't a groundswell of critical support for it. And I would hate to have missed out on that one.
Deb,
Your Fairy Chrismother. Keeper of Keith's leather wristband. Keeper of Pocket Anomalies. WWAJD?
REPORT BROKEN LINKS info@chris-marquette.com http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=ho … ef=profile
Wanna talk to President Obama? http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/ Close Gitmo/Open Cuba.
Offline
*shrug* i dont think i would cry if all of a sudden there were no movie critics out there. Most movie watching decision are really based on the trailer, or word of mouth for me usually. But Rick definitely has a point too about the smaller indy movies. The ones that dont have trailers plastered across the tv, posters everywhere or even big stars. Critics do tend to draw attention to those movies. Believe it or not its how i was first turned onto Alpha Dog. On the outset it didnt really play to a movie that i would have liked but saw a review and gave it a chance. Now its without doubt one of my favourite movies of all time. So i guess they have their place in our world. The unofficial critics, that are more bloggers just looking for something to talk about and chose to judge movies, yeah they can shove it!
-- Kate
"I will mix my tongue with strings and drums, and give my soul away " --
KissChasy
Offline
I think you made some really good points, Illinois.
And, Kate, I agree a lot with what you've said, especially about Alpha Dog.
I hardly ever read movie reviews anymore and I was never a fan of movie reviewers like Roger Ebert. I don't understand why male movie reviewers would watch chick flick movies and then review them saying they hate them. Of course they hated the film because it didn't interest them and they already knew it wouldn' t before they even saw the movie because the genre is obviously aimed towards females.
Offline
Real, paid critics have to see everything. That's their job. They don't get to discriminate against chick flicks, or popcorn movies, or torture porn, just because it's not their favorite thing. And the true professionals review movies on the basis of quality and how the movie fulfills it's potential, not because it's necessarily "their" kind of film. At least with a guy like Ebert, you've got someone who is really open minded (or at least he was when he was younger), a film historian, and someone who understands genre.
Deb,
Your Fairy Chrismother. Keeper of Keith's leather wristband. Keeper of Pocket Anomalies. WWAJD?
REPORT BROKEN LINKS info@chris-marquette.com http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=ho … ef=profile
Wanna talk to President Obama? http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/ Close Gitmo/Open Cuba.
Offline
Pages: 1