 |
|
Film Critics: Need to remember fandom first and foremost. Film studios are now using more than ever the dreaded "not screened for critics" banner for more and more films. It is an alarming number of films. Most of the films not screened for critics include remakes, horror films, gross out comedies, and films that you groan when you see the trailer for them. I suppose they have a point. Why screen a film you know the critics are going to take turns beating silly with a hammer for a half hour? The people who want to see these types of films are going to see them regardless of whether the New York Times or Roger Ebert says it is one of the worst films of the year. On the same token, those who are not into these types of films know from seeing the trailer, it is not worth a view. Which begs my first question, how important are critics? Not as important as they once were I am sad to report. Back in the day a solid Pauline Kael review could get your film released by a studio and a good chunk of money. Back when film critics meant something. Not just anyone was a film critic. There was no Internet or message boards for anyone with an opinion to spout off their thoughts on a film. Nowadays you can't tell who is real, who is legit, and just who is who with film critics. Look at such sites as Rotten Tomatoes.com. There is 132 reviews of the new Martin Scorsese film The Departed. How the heck are people suppose to know out of all those critics which one to trust? How do they know what critic might be working for a studio? Which one is having a bad day and just spouting off on a film for the hell of it? That is the thing. You don't know. While it is refreshing that there are so many voices and opinions out there, it also hurts the credibility of film critics. You just don't know who to trust. Which is why Roger Ebert will always be the best film critic out there. He has been around forever and has a long list of reviews under his belt. You know where he is coming from, you know his deal, and you know what to expect from him. He is reliable and trust worthy. Everyone else? Not too sure. Another key factor for film is something overlooked often and that is audience participation. I have been to a handful of press screenings and to be honest, I prefer seeing a film with an audience. Screenings are always nice to save money, but I'll always enjoy an audience experience. My early memories of film include going to the movies on a Friday night with a lively audience, friends, and having a great time. It is important with film to always remember to be a fan and don't be afraid to be swept up in the moment. I have seen so many film critics who act self important, bitter, cynical, and have hate for the industry. I promised myself I would never become like that. I'm always a film fan, first and foremost. I never forget that. I'm in line buying tickets on Friday night, yelling, screaming, and having a great time. I'd rather pay the 9.50 and have a good time. It is a price well paid to see the magic of cinema unfold before my eyes with an audience in a dark room. It is the most fun you can have in a dark room with a projection screen. So next time you are looking for a critic to trust or listen to, listen to the critic who is having the most fun. The critic who knows the magic of storytelling. The critic who is sitting there with you and enjoying the film right next to you. They know what you like because they are there with you smiling right along. The critic who knows what it means to be a fan. It is a business, but that does mean it can't be fun.
|
|
Have something to say about this article? Pop on over to Cinema-Lunatics
|
|
|
