Re: jeff_v
Message: I'm sorry. Given my enormous ego, I couldn't help but think that a distinct inspiration for your "Critics vs. Reviewers" article was me, and maybe my "Blue Velvet" review, if not just my general existence on this website. Your disdain for me has become clearer over the years, as if it weren't obvious by the differences in our ratings. I'll admit it: by your definition of the 2 types, I am a reviewer. To seriously and thoughtfully CRITIQUE a film is an invaluable skill, and I'm an avid reader of Ebert's Great Movies feature, filmsite.org, and jeff_v's own About Film. Applying (or extracting) meaning from the art of cinema is a fascinating practice, like the study of literature or of any other medium, really. But as I've made clear time and again, I personally don't have what it takes as a writer (or a thinker, even) to join the club. When either someone tells me or I read up on why "Eyes Wide Shut" is a masterpiece (as I had to do for a film class a few years back), I'll be like "wow, that's neat" and it'll give something to think about, etc. etc. But I've always considered that someone else's job. Me, I'm in it for the entertainment value. And no, to all the pretentious film snobs, that doesn't mean I'm a slack-jawed moron who loves all the dumb movies and hates all the smart ones. It means that I just plain love movies. I don't watch them obsessively to judge their thematic content or, as jeff_v put it, to "evaluate the film as art". I watch them obsessively because it's my favorite past-time. It brings me joy in all kinds of ways (happiness, sadness, thoughtfulness, nostalgia, awe, wish-fulfillment, interestingness, whatever adjective describes the effect of originality) and while I take it seriously in that it's an inseparable aspect of my personality, of my whole life, I don't really take it seriously, y'know? I don't think I should have to. It's something that I take pleasure in, not something that I feel obliged to do. Yet, at the same time, it doesn't seem fair to classify all the non-critics as public service guides. I guess that's my only real worth in this online community of movie rating, but it's not like I'm motivated by the need to advise people. I never really cared for that part of the process. I have no interest in recommending films to other people, especially since, if you don't know a person really well, let alone at all (as is the case with any professional reviewer writing to the masses), then you really don't know what's good for someone. Even when you try to appeal to specific interests, like when they say "if you like this type of movie, or this actor, or these 10 other similar movies, then you're sure to like this one!", it's still a weak probability, I'd say. At least, it has always been with me, so I respect the unique tastes of each person and prefer not to pretend that I can do them a favor (although when you get down to it, I suppose recommendations are fairly useful in a broad way, to at least give people an idea of selections that reflect what they like). Besides which, I'm selfish and self-contained. When I rate a movie on this site, and especially when I write a "review" as well, I'm doing it because I feel compelled to both express myself and deliver the gospel truth about the movie in question. What with the decline in my writing abilities, I've long since abandoned the effort to do so in a refreshing or intelligent style, so my reviews now are pretty redundant and annoyingly verbose. But I still gotta do 'em every now and then. I can't help it. And so what if I'm not evaluating "Freddy vs. Jason" as an art form? So what if I'm not trying to determine whether or not you the anonymous reader should go see it? Like jeff_v said, we all (hopefully) know what our tastes are, and the select few who care a little more about movies also can fairly accurately calculate the quality of a movie without requiring the advice of reviewer #12, so what good are my words or my ratings? They're not to anyone but myself. I like reading my own reviews and looking back on all my ratings. It's an obsession. But I also like reading other people's reviews - predominantly my trusted ones, as jeff_v pointed out, yet I also like reading any and every review I can find about whatever movie happens to interest me at that very moment. Usually after I see a movie I'll consult my shelves upon shelves of movie guides and scan through my many bookmared movie review sites to check for everyone's opinion on the movie because, I dunno, I think someone explained once that the curiosity factor there has to do with seeking approval of our own opinions as well as simply wanting to learn more about the title itself while it waivers in our immediate memory. That sort of thing. As a hobby, it's an acquired taste, perhaps, one that I'm sure jeff_v doesn't share, but whatever. That's why I think my lame, shallow, overly self-conscious reviews are somewhat kinda sorta semi-pseudo-quasi valuable to the world. Because just as I like to read everything about a movie, so too might there be another out there who does the same, and as I provide reviews for my own personal enjoyment, by posting them in a public forum such as this, maybe someone someday could read it and think, "hey, he feels the same way I do. He even commented on the same little detail that I noticed. Cool!...I wonder if there's any more juice in the fridge..." It could happen.
But yeah, I also agree that a good critic expands your understanding of the movie. Or, if not your understanding, then your appreciation, because usually in my case, as a reader, the most memorable critiques are ones that expand and perfectly articulate my own feelings for a movie (like I said earlier, the approval-seeking motive). There are plenty of instances of intriguing pieces whose outlooks clash with mine (like James B.'s take on "Blue Velvet" that I posted in my review), but even then, the strength of the piece lies in the power of the writer to convey himself so effectively as to tempt a reversal of my own perspective. He made a convincing case for the movie. Course, even if I completely disagree with the person (i.e. jeff_v), that doesn't mean they didn't deliver a good evaluation, but that's not my point. Reviews like those of "SLC Punk!" and "13 Conversations About One Thing" by Roger Ebert, or "Babe: Pig in the City" by Hollywood Bitchslap writer Collin Souter (http://www.hollywoodbitchslap.com/review.php?movie=187&reviewer=233), or “The Royal Tenenbaums” by slant magazine writer Ed Gonzalez (http://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/dvd_review.asp?ID=59), are ones I remember and cite because they do indeed realize the vaporous, ineffable thoughts that float in our minds after watching those films. And I do wish I was capable of those realizations, but the fact is that's jeff_v's responsibility. He's one of the elite, one of the wisemen. Me, I'm the everyman, the guy who adds all the unheard-of '80s horror films to the OOFnet database. He sees "Love and Diane", I see "You've Got Mail". I wish our methods weren't categorized as mutually exclusive, I wish it weren't necessary to point out that I'm the stupider half for generally preferring a sweet romantic comedy to a challenging indie drama, but that's a hurdle we'll have to overcome another day. Another day called never. I had more points to make, but as usual, I've lost sight of them, and gone on for way too long already. And your article probably had nothing to do with me whatsoever, so hello embarrassment, my name's Mike.
I will try to sum up what I was saying, though: just because critics delve deeper into movies doesn't mean that reviewers are a waste of time. You might say everyone on this website is a reviewer, since they offer nothing more than brief comments on one or 2 facets of a movie, if even that. So they may all be "reviewers" according to your distinction, but I still like reading what they have to say, and to peruse their numeric ratings. And I do not believe that I have a responsibility to mirror the tastes of audiences just because I don't fit into the Pretentious, Overly-Serious Film Student mold. In other words, we can all be friends, right? Maybe? How about a happy face? :)
I can tell you're more interested in talking about what constitutes a Movie Critic than in attacking the other side, so forgive me if I seem defensive (because I totally am), but as a representative of the other side, I had to throw in my 2 cents. Please don't hate me (more)
|
|