CRITICS

The job of the critic is to love movies - to share their enthusiasm and affection, inspiring an audience to new and wonderful experiences - but it is so rare that I read or see a review that seem to come from any kind of love.  Unless you consider greed, self-aggrandizement, and megalomania as an expression of love.

Critics (some would say unfortunately - but then again who isn't a critic) are part of the process of movie making. The job of the critic is to view the movie without prejudice and communicate their reaction to their readership. Did he love the movie? Or hate the movie? How did it make him feel? How it the movie make him see the world or himself in a different way. Or is the movie simple an empty diversion - an entertainment offering the viewer an escape from his difficult or empty life.

The critic should work on behalf of the audience.  In this country today, critics are seem to be apologists for the film industry.  My reviews seem be all about the business side of movie making.

The job of the critic is not to tell his readers how he would have made the movie were he given the chance.

Criticism is rarely an art. Critics almost never have an aesthetic. Even more rarely do they have a personal or heart felt point of view. I like having a sense of the critic as a person - he's the filter through which I get a glimpse of the movie. Most critics give me little sense of themselves.

Most reviewers don't seem to have any reaction to the movies they see - and lacking that, they proceed to tell their reader the plot of the story, commenting on the filmmaker's skill at communicating that plot. This in the end effectively destroys any chance the audience might have had to really see the movie with their own eyes - without prejudice.

 

Writing	Directing	Acting	Shooting
Editing	Producing	Financing	Distribution