Feel free to share your positive feelings...
August 1, 2023 6:36 AM Subscribe
On the erosion of film criticism by influencers. Manuela Lazic laments the decline of film criticism's vitality.
The tl;dr bit of it is as follows: posted by Fizz at 6:39 AM on August 1, 2023 [8 favorites]
This is mostly speculation, but I would guess there is just as much, if not more, good film criticism out there as there ever was, it is just that there is 1000 times as much bad film criticism out there. The problem is audience and attention and the the feeling that any review that isn't published on the Friday of opening weekend is pointless. The really good stuff takes awhile to get thought up and written and published and by then, does anyone still care?
posted by jacquilynne at 6:51 AM on August 1, 2023 [40 favorites]
posted by jacquilynne at 6:51 AM on August 1, 2023 [40 favorites]
I'm dreamwidth friends with someone who has a Patreon for classic film reviews they write and occasionally cross-posts them and also discusses current tv and movies more casually. I have heard of a fraction of the films they mention and their tastes are very different to mine, but I absolutely love reading their thoughts because the expertise is just so joyful when given free rein - a 500 to 5,000 word essay that brings in all these different strands to turn a film into a whole new way to look at the world. Honestly, I would rather read their review than watch the film sometimes.
Film criticism isn't film marketing and the paying audience is people who care about criticism as an artform - craft? - in itself. The loss of spaces for new writers to learn and practice reviews will hurt badly in time. I rely mostly on my direct friends' experiences of media now to try anything that costs money or more than a couple of hours - commercial reviews are too positive.
posted by dorothyisunderwood at 6:53 AM on August 1, 2023 [5 favorites]
Film criticism isn't film marketing and the paying audience is people who care about criticism as an artform - craft? - in itself. The loss of spaces for new writers to learn and practice reviews will hurt badly in time. I rely mostly on my direct friends' experiences of media now to try anything that costs money or more than a couple of hours - commercial reviews are too positive.
posted by dorothyisunderwood at 6:53 AM on August 1, 2023 [5 favorites]
The democratising effect is undeniable, but so is the cheapening one, literally and figuratively. With so many more people writing about cinema online, fees for reviews have fallen to shockingly low levels and the expertise supposedly required of film critics has been forgotten – knowledge of the film history and good writing skills are less and less valued.
I mean, sure, but is this something new? This critic was in high school when AICN was on the rise, but surely she knows who Harry Knowles was?
posted by The Bellman at 7:01 AM on August 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
I mean, sure, but is this something new? This critic was in high school when AICN was on the rise, but surely she knows who Harry Knowles was?
posted by The Bellman at 7:01 AM on August 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
This is mostly speculation, but I would guess there is just as much, if not more, good film criticism out there as there ever was, it is just that there is 1000 times as much bad film criticism out there.
This is true of effectively all artistic endeavours now. Access and publication has been democratized, discoverability and quality filters have either not kept pace or have matured into something unrecognizable, depending on which side of a generational divide you find yourself on.
I strongly suspect that the pre-democratization gatekeeping of "good criticism" was far more of an Old Boys Club than anything like an actual quality filter, and if anything deserves to drowned into irrelevance by the deluge, it's the Old Boys Clubbers.
posted by mhoye at 7:07 AM on August 1, 2023 [21 favorites]
This is true of effectively all artistic endeavours now. Access and publication has been democratized, discoverability and quality filters have either not kept pace or have matured into something unrecognizable, depending on which side of a generational divide you find yourself on.
I strongly suspect that the pre-democratization gatekeeping of "good criticism" was far more of an Old Boys Club than anything like an actual quality filter, and if anything deserves to drowned into irrelevance by the deluge, it's the Old Boys Clubbers.
posted by mhoye at 7:07 AM on August 1, 2023 [21 favorites]
In my more cynical moments, I feel this article to be 100% true and that along with criticism also the overall media literacy of audiences has declined in the past few decades to such an extent that "the ending of Marvel Movie X explained!" videos get millions of views when the plot is explicitly designed to be unchallenging to a mildly engaged toddler. Hot takes get more traction than well-thought out takes so the systems encourage more hot takes ad infinitum.
In my more optimistic moments, I think jacquilynne above is exactly right: democratisation of platforms means there's more everything, and the good stuff has never been more accessible even if you might have to sift through more content to get to it. I subscribe to many, many media criticism YouTube channels and podcasts that have provided me hours or thought-provoking content from more diverse voices and perspectives than ever before.
In conclusion, film criticism is a land of contrasts.
posted by slimepuppy at 7:08 AM on August 1, 2023 [6 favorites]
In my more optimistic moments, I think jacquilynne above is exactly right: democratisation of platforms means there's more everything, and the good stuff has never been more accessible even if you might have to sift through more content to get to it. I subscribe to many, many media criticism YouTube channels and podcasts that have provided me hours or thought-provoking content from more diverse voices and perspectives than ever before.
In conclusion, film criticism is a land of contrasts.
posted by slimepuppy at 7:08 AM on August 1, 2023 [6 favorites]
So maybe just find and pay attention to the film critics you value?
You can choose your signal to noise ratio.
posted by ITravelMontana at 7:08 AM on August 1, 2023 [7 favorites]
You can choose your signal to noise ratio.
posted by ITravelMontana at 7:08 AM on August 1, 2023 [7 favorites]
Whither FILM CRIT HULK ?
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:16 AM on August 1, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:16 AM on August 1, 2023 [8 favorites]
HE GOT CANCELLED
The "old gatekeepers" complaint has some validity but at this point, it's starting to make it sound as if white men are endowed with nasty critical facilities and everyone else is endowed with nice, healing positivity. Really? Let other people have a chance at it.
posted by kingdead at 7:24 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
The "old gatekeepers" complaint has some validity but at this point, it's starting to make it sound as if white men are endowed with nasty critical facilities and everyone else is endowed with nice, healing positivity. Really? Let other people have a chance at it.
posted by kingdead at 7:24 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
Someone should create a place on the internet where one could go to to get links to the actual good stuff so we don't have to wade through all the mediocrity people seem to be putting out there these days. A crowd sourced filter of the worthwhile stuff, ya know?
One can dream.
posted by dchase at 7:30 AM on August 1, 2023 [16 favorites]
One can dream.
posted by dchase at 7:30 AM on August 1, 2023 [16 favorites]
Rogerebert.com is still going strong, and as a original member of Ebert Club I get their weekly email. It feels like Chaz has done a good job of curating a number of critics who seem to have the same outlook as Roger, whose sensibilities were similar to mine. Between that and Film Comment I get my fill.
Plus, I consider Ebert my Grand Sponsor as his blogpost on AA is what got me into the program.
I think @jacquilynne's comment gets it right. There is still good criticism, but you have to search for it.
posted by indianbadger1 at 7:36 AM on August 1, 2023 [6 favorites]
Plus, I consider Ebert my Grand Sponsor as his blogpost on AA is what got me into the program.
I think @jacquilynne's comment gets it right. There is still good criticism, but you have to search for it.
posted by indianbadger1 at 7:36 AM on August 1, 2023 [6 favorites]
I'm in a local restaurant group on Facebook that has enforced positivity - no negative or even mixed reviews of restaurants are allowed. It serves as a way to find out about places we don't know about, but is absolutely useless for assessing their quality. It turns out that the person who started the group is looking to become some kind of local influencer in the food scene, and is trying to cozy up to restaurant owners and chefs by enforcing positive reviews. They're even mining the group for content for some new website/online magazine they're putting together. It's weird and a bit off-putting, and seems related to this issue, at least in my mind.
posted by mollweide at 7:36 AM on August 1, 2023 [10 favorites]
posted by mollweide at 7:36 AM on August 1, 2023 [10 favorites]
She does also point out, although not till the end, that Barbie and Oppenheimer not only had much that merited a viewing - for different reasons- but that their arrival heralded some of the best film writing for a while. That writing may have been triggered by trailers and pre-interviews alone: but those were also great trailers and interviews. The rise of elaborate, lengthy, competing visual essays about material which is actually good enough to merit it - whether that be a Succession episode or Barbie’s set design- is a real delight for me - not something that used to be available.
posted by rongorongo at 7:37 AM on August 1, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by rongorongo at 7:37 AM on August 1, 2023 [7 favorites]
So maybe just find and pay attention to the film critics you value?
This, but don't forget to wander off and try to discover some new voices once in awhile.
posted by chavenet at 7:38 AM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
This, but don't forget to wander off and try to discover some new voices once in awhile.
posted by chavenet at 7:38 AM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
I think a bigger blow to film criticism has been the aggregators (Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic) that boil down a movie to a single number. When those sites first arrived, it seemed like a wonderful way to easily access the opinions of a wide range of critics, but as time has gone on, I think it has done the opposite-- just smushed all the nuance and subtleties of reviews to one number that gets passed around as the only arbiter of a film's value.
posted by gwint at 7:40 AM on August 1, 2023 [24 favorites]
posted by gwint at 7:40 AM on August 1, 2023 [24 favorites]
The "old gatekeepers" complaint has some validity but at this point, it's starting to make it sound as if white men are endowed with nasty critical facilities and everyone else is endowed with nice, healing positivity. Really? Let other people have a chance at it.
It's more that there's a sense of a bit of "mean girls" in the concept of formal criticism - the author complains about Anton Ego, but fails to acknowledge why his character resonated with the public. It's also worth pointing out that Ego does get redeemed in the end when he reconnects with why he got into criticism in the first place, remembering how his mother's cooking reassured him, and in turn writes positively, acknowledging the point of "talent can come from anywhere."
That's not to say there isn't a place for negative criticism, but I think that too many critics get too into it, that the place of the critic is to tear down, to find fault. And yes, there is such a thing as toxic positivity, but at the same time I find that negativity goes toxic a lot faster.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:58 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
It's more that there's a sense of a bit of "mean girls" in the concept of formal criticism - the author complains about Anton Ego, but fails to acknowledge why his character resonated with the public. It's also worth pointing out that Ego does get redeemed in the end when he reconnects with why he got into criticism in the first place, remembering how his mother's cooking reassured him, and in turn writes positively, acknowledging the point of "talent can come from anywhere."
That's not to say there isn't a place for negative criticism, but I think that too many critics get too into it, that the place of the critic is to tear down, to find fault. And yes, there is such a thing as toxic positivity, but at the same time I find that negativity goes toxic a lot faster.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:58 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
"the ending of Marvel Movie X explained!" videos get millions of views when the plot is explicitly designed to be unchallenging to a mildly engaged toddler.I think those videos are about congratulating the viewer (or giving the viewer cover for self-congratulation) for how smart they were. An awful lot of "$Thing review," "$Thing revisited," and "$Thing explained" style media is like that. They're not really informative, they're more like a mantra that goes "I have good taste and make astute observations, I have good taste and make astute observations." Sometimes the real audience seems to be the reviewer himself. (These things are virtually always made by men, in my experience.)
posted by Western Infidels at 8:05 AM on August 1, 2023 [9 favorites]
I think those videos are about congratulating the viewer (or giving the viewer cover for self-congratulation) for how smart they were.
I'd not thought about it that way before. That really resonates though and feels like it describes a lot of the content being discussed here. Reassurance masquerading as criticism.
posted by slimepuppy at 8:13 AM on August 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
I'd not thought about it that way before. That really resonates though and feels like it describes a lot of the content being discussed here. Reassurance masquerading as criticism.
posted by slimepuppy at 8:13 AM on August 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
If the internet has paved the way for the devaluation of cinema via streaming platforms, it has also done the same for film criticism. The democratising effect is undeniable, but so is the cheapening one, literally and figuratively.
One of the other aspects to this as well is that streaming has given, to some anyways, the illusion that all of film cinema history is available at your fingertips. While there is a lot available, there is a lot that is simply not available or only available through extraordinary means. And sometimes when it is available it may not be in an optimal viewing state (viz. watching a low res TV print transferred from a VHS of a widescreen film on youtube is not the same thing as watching a pristine print in the correct aspect ratio with the correct audio) hampering and sometimes misleading the reviewer (I've see no shortage of "old and fuzzy" complaints about films in reviews). The erosion of film knowledge and film history hampers film criticism, IMO.
It's true you don't need to watch every Nolan film or all his influences or a documentary to understand and/or enjoy Oppenheimer for instance but it does help if you plan to write something that is more complex than "this rox!" or "this sux!" or "OMG the MEMES!" because as was said above, and bears repeating, "Film criticism isn't film marketing." Nor is the minute dissection of whatever large scale film with an enormous fan base (the endless videos where a reviewer dissects all the irritating things about a Star Wars or superhero film is utterly exhausting).
But yeah all this isn't really new but I do think that it seems to be now more of a firehose versus a garden hose and much harder for the average consumer (and content producer!) to tell them apart.
posted by Ashwagandha at 8:37 AM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
One of the other aspects to this as well is that streaming has given, to some anyways, the illusion that all of film cinema history is available at your fingertips. While there is a lot available, there is a lot that is simply not available or only available through extraordinary means. And sometimes when it is available it may not be in an optimal viewing state (viz. watching a low res TV print transferred from a VHS of a widescreen film on youtube is not the same thing as watching a pristine print in the correct aspect ratio with the correct audio) hampering and sometimes misleading the reviewer (I've see no shortage of "old and fuzzy" complaints about films in reviews). The erosion of film knowledge and film history hampers film criticism, IMO.
It's true you don't need to watch every Nolan film or all his influences or a documentary to understand and/or enjoy Oppenheimer for instance but it does help if you plan to write something that is more complex than "this rox!" or "this sux!" or "OMG the MEMES!" because as was said above, and bears repeating, "Film criticism isn't film marketing." Nor is the minute dissection of whatever large scale film with an enormous fan base (the endless videos where a reviewer dissects all the irritating things about a Star Wars or superhero film is utterly exhausting).
But yeah all this isn't really new but I do think that it seems to be now more of a firehose versus a garden hose and much harder for the average consumer (and content producer!) to tell them apart.
posted by Ashwagandha at 8:37 AM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
This feels like yet another in a long string of stories about how the dual nature of film as commerce and art creates uncomfortable tension. Combine that with the uncomfortable tension created by the dual nature of criticism as commerce and art, and boy now everybody is upset and confused.
Criticism may be changing, but I don't think we're in any danger of losing it entirely. Now, maybe serious critics are at risk of losing their exclusive pre-release access to content, and I don't doubt that their feelings about that are reflect both personal and professional concerns. But if embargoed release-day criticism goes away entirely, the only content that will be available about a movie on release day will be marketing material (including quid-pro-quo influencer pap), which nobody should expect to say anything negative. And, I don't know, I guess I don't feel like that's a huge deal? It's definitely bad to have marketing masquerade as criticism, but I don't buy that being the case here.
Maybe once it's relieved of the need to help consumers decide what they should spend their money on, criticism can focus on really engaging with the work. Criticism whose punchline doesn't have to boil down to a "thumbs up/down" or "fresh/rotten" or "X stars out of 5" seems like an improvement and an opportunity to have a more meaningful conversation about media.
posted by angrynerd at 8:39 AM on August 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
Criticism may be changing, but I don't think we're in any danger of losing it entirely. Now, maybe serious critics are at risk of losing their exclusive pre-release access to content, and I don't doubt that their feelings about that are reflect both personal and professional concerns. But if embargoed release-day criticism goes away entirely, the only content that will be available about a movie on release day will be marketing material (including quid-pro-quo influencer pap), which nobody should expect to say anything negative. And, I don't know, I guess I don't feel like that's a huge deal? It's definitely bad to have marketing masquerade as criticism, but I don't buy that being the case here.
Maybe once it's relieved of the need to help consumers decide what they should spend their money on, criticism can focus on really engaging with the work. Criticism whose punchline doesn't have to boil down to a "thumbs up/down" or "fresh/rotten" or "X stars out of 5" seems like an improvement and an opportunity to have a more meaningful conversation about media.
posted by angrynerd at 8:39 AM on August 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
I miss Lindsay Ellis. I still hate how she basically got harassed out of YouTube.
(I know she's on Nebula now, but so far I don't feel inclined to commit to paying for that.)
posted by jenfullmoon at 8:48 AM on August 1, 2023 [6 favorites]
(I know she's on Nebula now, but so far I don't feel inclined to commit to paying for that.)
posted by jenfullmoon at 8:48 AM on August 1, 2023 [6 favorites]
I kind of think we're in a golden age of film and television criticism. In addition to millions of people being free to express their views on social media, a very sizeable number of people have been able to harvest the revenue generating potentials of podcasts and YouTube to support work at a high level of professionalism. I think there are probably two of each of the latter for every one person who lost their job as a staff film critic for a metro daily or alt weekly.
posted by MattD at 8:49 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by MattD at 8:49 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
Conservatives get all the hype, but never discount the investment film nerds have in the Things Were Better Back When I Was Young game. Very few peers.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:12 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:12 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
it's starting to make it sound as if white men are endowed with nasty critical facilities and everyone else is endowed with nice, healing positivity.
maybe it's a zeitgeist thing but at the time that I suddenly decided that movies were an important thing worth thinking and reading about (my early teens - the 1970s), two of the key voices in film criticism were women. In fact, they're the only two names that even come to mind right now:
Judith Crist, who wrote weekly stuff for TV Guide, and thus was, for a while, probably the most widely read, listened to and watched film critic in the world, and
Pauline Kael who may not have been reaching as many people as Crist, but certainly seemed to be finding the right ones. She even has her own movie now.
Anyway, neither of them were limited in their scope to what I would term being nice. Far from it.
posted by philip-random at 9:19 AM on August 1, 2023 [5 favorites]
maybe it's a zeitgeist thing but at the time that I suddenly decided that movies were an important thing worth thinking and reading about (my early teens - the 1970s), two of the key voices in film criticism were women. In fact, they're the only two names that even come to mind right now:
Judith Crist, who wrote weekly stuff for TV Guide, and thus was, for a while, probably the most widely read, listened to and watched film critic in the world, and
Pauline Kael who may not have been reaching as many people as Crist, but certainly seemed to be finding the right ones. She even has her own movie now.
Anyway, neither of them were limited in their scope to what I would term being nice. Far from it.
posted by philip-random at 9:19 AM on August 1, 2023 [5 favorites]
the good stuff has never been more accessible even if you might have to sift through more content to get to it.
The second part of this seems to contradict the first, IMO.
Gatekeepers (publishers, etc.) served a vital role in culture, but they were often bad in objectionable ways: refusing to publish POC/women critics, refusing to publish writing on films about certain topics or featuring certain ideas, etc.
We then decided that the concept of gatekeeping was bad, not the quality of the gatekeeping. I think this was a mistake.
posted by rhymedirective at 9:38 AM on August 1, 2023 [7 favorites]
The second part of this seems to contradict the first, IMO.
Gatekeepers (publishers, etc.) served a vital role in culture, but they were often bad in objectionable ways: refusing to publish POC/women critics, refusing to publish writing on films about certain topics or featuring certain ideas, etc.
We then decided that the concept of gatekeeping was bad, not the quality of the gatekeeping. I think this was a mistake.
posted by rhymedirective at 9:38 AM on August 1, 2023 [7 favorites]
Maybe once it's relieved of the need to help consumers decide what they should spend their money on, criticism can focus on really engaging with the work. Criticism whose punchline doesn't have to boil down to a "thumbs up/down" or "fresh/rotten" or "X stars out of 5" seems like an improvement and an opportunity to have a more meaningful conversation about media.
This is definitely the biggest real change in the role of criticism. Its recommendation function is less important than ever (though it still has a bit more weight in deciding to see a film than to listen to an album where I can just do it). I usually find myself reading reviews after watching a film, for the purpose of reflection. I do still tend to gravitate towards professional print critics because they can write and they do write. I’m not that interested in the Letterboxd one-liner competition, nor video reviews as long as the film. But the newspaper critics, too, are often writing to a formula that doesn’t offer the kind of in-depth discussion I’d really like.
posted by atoxyl at 9:41 AM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
This is definitely the biggest real change in the role of criticism. Its recommendation function is less important than ever (though it still has a bit more weight in deciding to see a film than to listen to an album where I can just do it). I usually find myself reading reviews after watching a film, for the purpose of reflection. I do still tend to gravitate towards professional print critics because they can write and they do write. I’m not that interested in the Letterboxd one-liner competition, nor video reviews as long as the film. But the newspaper critics, too, are often writing to a formula that doesn’t offer the kind of in-depth discussion I’d really like.
posted by atoxyl at 9:41 AM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
Stephanie Zacharek is quite good as well.
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 9:43 AM on August 1, 2023
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 9:43 AM on August 1, 2023
it's starting to make it sound as if white men are endowed with nasty critical facilities and everyone else is endowed with nice, healing positivity
I’m not actually sure what side of which debate this is supposed to come down on, but, acknowledging that I am a white guy with somewhat predictable taste, there’s zero chance that I would be convinced check out a film critic on the basis of a “nice healing positivity”
posted by atoxyl at 9:48 AM on August 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
I’m not actually sure what side of which debate this is supposed to come down on, but, acknowledging that I am a white guy with somewhat predictable taste, there’s zero chance that I would be convinced check out a film critic on the basis of a “nice healing positivity”
posted by atoxyl at 9:48 AM on August 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
Some pundit voiced the opinion that most movies were crap. ..Might have been a Howard Stern interview...I thought nothing of it, but upon further reflection I think he made a valid point...Or it could just be me...never was a huge cinema person, or television either..
posted by Czjewel at 10:05 AM on August 1, 2023
posted by Czjewel at 10:05 AM on August 1, 2023
Some pundit voiced the opinion that most movies were crap. ..Might have been a Howard Stern interview
You are referring to "Sturgeon's Law"
posted by briank at 10:29 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
You are referring to "Sturgeon's Law"
posted by briank at 10:29 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
It used to be that you'd find thoughtful, insightful reviews of websites in the pages of magazines like Wired and Mondo 2000, but then people just started writing up their own reviews of websites and putting them online for free. Looks at what passes for web criticism now! Links to Nyans Cats! Analysis of news articles about trends on other web sites! Discussions about thinkpieces about criticism! This is what the millenials think "the best of the web" is, and it's disgusting. None of these people are even getting paid!
posted by phooky at 10:30 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by phooky at 10:30 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
mollweide: "I'm in a local restaurant group on Facebook that has enforced positivity - no negative or even mixed reviews of restaurants are allowed. It serves as a way to find out about places we don't know about, but is absolutely useless for assessing their quality. It turns out that the person who started the group is looking to become some kind of local influencer in the food scene, and is trying to cozy up to restaurant owners and chefs by enforcing positive reviews. They're even mining the group for content for some new website/online magazine they're putting together. It's weird and a bit off-putting, and seems related to this issue, at least in my mind."
I see you are in NJ but the exact same thing in every detail is happening on Facebook where I live in central NC. Every post is pre-moderated before appearing. I once posted a warning, without naming the guilty restaurant, about a tableside offer to shave fake flavorless "truffles" onto your pasta for a hidden $15 per plate upcharge. It was rejected for negativity. The group owner even took the time to send me an explanation noting that she had never seen the practice and hinted that she doubted it happened. The next day she posted a glowing review of that very same restaurant where one can expect to pay about $125 per person for dinner. She had been treated to several specialties there for which there were staged photos. She also hosts special event menus at some of the restaurants she favors, occasionally announces that she will be a one-evening guest bartender with a special cocktail she has designed at some of these same establishments, and conducts charity fundraisers that seem to be aimed at raising her profile. The group is immensely popular as people love posting their food pictures as well as their home cooking adventures and culinary questions. But the group owner's self-promotion is so over the top, I have to be embarrassed for her. I figure it must be a full-time job to pre-moderate every post to such a high volume group. It must take a special kind of blind spot to think of oneself as an "influencer" and not cringe.
posted by 3.2.3 at 10:44 AM on August 1, 2023 [8 favorites]
I see you are in NJ but the exact same thing in every detail is happening on Facebook where I live in central NC. Every post is pre-moderated before appearing. I once posted a warning, without naming the guilty restaurant, about a tableside offer to shave fake flavorless "truffles" onto your pasta for a hidden $15 per plate upcharge. It was rejected for negativity. The group owner even took the time to send me an explanation noting that she had never seen the practice and hinted that she doubted it happened. The next day she posted a glowing review of that very same restaurant where one can expect to pay about $125 per person for dinner. She had been treated to several specialties there for which there were staged photos. She also hosts special event menus at some of the restaurants she favors, occasionally announces that she will be a one-evening guest bartender with a special cocktail she has designed at some of these same establishments, and conducts charity fundraisers that seem to be aimed at raising her profile. The group is immensely popular as people love posting their food pictures as well as their home cooking adventures and culinary questions. But the group owner's self-promotion is so over the top, I have to be embarrassed for her. I figure it must be a full-time job to pre-moderate every post to such a high volume group. It must take a special kind of blind spot to think of oneself as an "influencer" and not cringe.
posted by 3.2.3 at 10:44 AM on August 1, 2023 [8 favorites]
I think there are two things being conflated here, movie reviews and movie criticism.
Movie reviews are great. They give you an idea if you are interested in a movie and if you find a reviewer whose taste meshes with yours it's like have a good friend with good recommendations.
Movie criticism is something else. It's digging into the depth and structure of film, drawing out references and cross currents within the medium. It might contain a review, a recommendation about the film being discussed, but it's going to be more reading it like literature and doing that level of analysis on the text.
Anyway, both are great, both are thriving. But I don't in my mind think of them as the same thing. And I think the author of the piece in this FPP isn't talking about movie reviews.
posted by hippybear at 11:16 AM on August 1, 2023 [8 favorites]
Movie reviews are great. They give you an idea if you are interested in a movie and if you find a reviewer whose taste meshes with yours it's like have a good friend with good recommendations.
Movie criticism is something else. It's digging into the depth and structure of film, drawing out references and cross currents within the medium. It might contain a review, a recommendation about the film being discussed, but it's going to be more reading it like literature and doing that level of analysis on the text.
Anyway, both are great, both are thriving. But I don't in my mind think of them as the same thing. And I think the author of the piece in this FPP isn't talking about movie reviews.
posted by hippybear at 11:16 AM on August 1, 2023 [8 favorites]
You can choose your signal to noise ratio
So maybe just find and pay attention to the film critics you value?
yes, you can choose your own S/N ratio, but the same problem proposed with film criticism, a massive increase in the plurality of voices making it hard to find the Signal in the Noise, is a problem that's shared with every other single thing on earth. I don't have the time or attention span to do that with one more thing with regard to information sifting. I think one of the reasons Rotten Tomatoes is successful is because most other people share this problem, and distilling many sources down to a number wipes away all the nuance, but it's at least something.
posted by Dr. Twist at 11:19 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
So maybe just find and pay attention to the film critics you value?
yes, you can choose your own S/N ratio, but the same problem proposed with film criticism, a massive increase in the plurality of voices making it hard to find the Signal in the Noise, is a problem that's shared with every other single thing on earth. I don't have the time or attention span to do that with one more thing with regard to information sifting. I think one of the reasons Rotten Tomatoes is successful is because most other people share this problem, and distilling many sources down to a number wipes away all the nuance, but it's at least something.
posted by Dr. Twist at 11:19 AM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
the feeling that any review that isn't published on the Friday of opening weekend is pointless. The really good stuff takes awhile to get thought up and written and published and by then, does anyone still care?
I suspect that most of the people who storm the theaters on opening weekend aren't those who care about thoughtful high quality film criticism, and vice versa.
The last time I went to a movie on opening weekend was the original Star Wars movie, and I was too young and excited to worry about reviews.
posted by Greg_Ace at 11:45 AM on August 1, 2023 [2 favorites]
I suspect that most of the people who storm the theaters on opening weekend aren't those who care about thoughtful high quality film criticism, and vice versa.
The last time I went to a movie on opening weekend was the original Star Wars movie, and I was too young and excited to worry about reviews.
posted by Greg_Ace at 11:45 AM on August 1, 2023 [2 favorites]
There was a period from the mid-50s to the mid-90s were a lot of journalistic--and business--practices around newspapers were invented. This includes every mid sized city have a local film critic or two. For people my age those tend to get cemented in people's mind as if they were objectively correct and not an accident of things like a monopoly on classified ads.
There are actually a lot of broad similarities with the Twitter meltdown people are talking about in a different FPP, just on a different timescale. It turns out that a business model wasn't a good thing to anchor a profession to. But like I said there, I suspect the alternative is not that there was a better way to do it; it was probably not to have a golden age of film criticism at all.
For the record it sucks to lose this. Both the movie part and the local newspapers in general. I have friends and relatives who were in journalism. I even reviewed some movies for the college paper and got the studio press kit treatments--which ever after made it obvious to me which critics were just channeling PR bits as if they were insights. Having learned to ignore some critics I find it a minor shift to ignore "influencers" as a class. I just want the good critics easier to find!
I could go on for a while about critics back then, but I want to say something about Kael: I remember her stuff in the New York in the '80s. She was a living legend and my smart friends in high school and college would quote her. But I never quite "got" her; she mostly seemed not to like movies. I later read that a lot of Kael afficionados think by that time she had simply gotten grouchy about movies; she was still a good writer, but no longer a good critic. It was her older stuff that made her reputation. So there was a decade of people into movies who grew up reading her and thought angry hates-almost-everything Kael was the model of a good critic.
posted by mark k at 12:07 PM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
There are actually a lot of broad similarities with the Twitter meltdown people are talking about in a different FPP, just on a different timescale. It turns out that a business model wasn't a good thing to anchor a profession to. But like I said there, I suspect the alternative is not that there was a better way to do it; it was probably not to have a golden age of film criticism at all.
For the record it sucks to lose this. Both the movie part and the local newspapers in general. I have friends and relatives who were in journalism. I even reviewed some movies for the college paper and got the studio press kit treatments--which ever after made it obvious to me which critics were just channeling PR bits as if they were insights. Having learned to ignore some critics I find it a minor shift to ignore "influencers" as a class. I just want the good critics easier to find!
I could go on for a while about critics back then, but I want to say something about Kael: I remember her stuff in the New York in the '80s. She was a living legend and my smart friends in high school and college would quote her. But I never quite "got" her; she mostly seemed not to like movies. I later read that a lot of Kael afficionados think by that time she had simply gotten grouchy about movies; she was still a good writer, but no longer a good critic. It was her older stuff that made her reputation. So there was a decade of people into movies who grew up reading her and thought angry hates-almost-everything Kael was the model of a good critic.
posted by mark k at 12:07 PM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
I suspect that most of the people who storm the theaters on opening weekend aren't those who care about thoughtful high quality film criticism
Little do you know, sir!
posted by praemunire at 12:13 PM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
Little do you know, sir!
posted by praemunire at 12:13 PM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
To be clear, I was referring to jacquilynne's comment about the criticism that takes a while to get written, i.e. usually after opening weekend has come and gone.
posted by Greg_Ace at 12:30 PM on August 1, 2023
posted by Greg_Ace at 12:30 PM on August 1, 2023
It's not exactly the same, but I am reminded of something that someone posted on Tumblr recently.
There's this thing called Dracula Daily, which takes the letters, journal entries, etc that make up the novel Dracula and sends out the ones for each calendar date on that day. Tumblr fucking loves it. And what that means is that there is this crowd-sourced, iterative commentary on the "current" events, with people bringing their own expertise to whatever detail they know something about, leading to a rich, multi-faceted engagement with the text that any one person could not hope to come close to touching. Along with silly memes and squeeing and Interneting.
But I, for one, wouldn't trade that multi-voiced, multi-expertised, collaborative approach for a single, authoritative analysis*. The problem I have is that there's just so much media that finding discussion of a particular piece of media is often difficult. I do wonder if there's a place in Fanfare for collecting interesting commentary.
*It is probably relevant that I'm a "fandom old" who is 40 and has been online since the 90s, which gives me particular experiences, preferences, and priorities that are idiosyncratic at best.
posted by DebetEsse at 1:19 PM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
There's this thing called Dracula Daily, which takes the letters, journal entries, etc that make up the novel Dracula and sends out the ones for each calendar date on that day. Tumblr fucking loves it. And what that means is that there is this crowd-sourced, iterative commentary on the "current" events, with people bringing their own expertise to whatever detail they know something about, leading to a rich, multi-faceted engagement with the text that any one person could not hope to come close to touching. Along with silly memes and squeeing and Interneting.
But I, for one, wouldn't trade that multi-voiced, multi-expertised, collaborative approach for a single, authoritative analysis*. The problem I have is that there's just so much media that finding discussion of a particular piece of media is often difficult. I do wonder if there's a place in Fanfare for collecting interesting commentary.
*It is probably relevant that I'm a "fandom old" who is 40 and has been online since the 90s, which gives me particular experiences, preferences, and priorities that are idiosyncratic at best.
posted by DebetEsse at 1:19 PM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
OMG I signed up for Dracula Daily last year, and they repeat the email string every year so I'm re-Draculaing again this summer.
I haven't participated with any of the social stuff taking place around it, either last year or this year, but I'm thrilled people are engaging with the novel this way.
It's going to be published as a physical book, I think with some of these reader annotations/commentary included. The novel and the Daily version are in a different order, because things like ships logs or diaries or letters might not be discovered until later in the novel, but are put in chronological order for the Daily. It is a different way to explore the same story.
I've long thought that Brunner's Stand On Zanzibar could be some kind of really interesting kind of interactive fiction project, with all the different kinds of media sources someohow made more literal than in the novel.
posted by hippybear at 1:30 PM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
I haven't participated with any of the social stuff taking place around it, either last year or this year, but I'm thrilled people are engaging with the novel this way.
It's going to be published as a physical book, I think with some of these reader annotations/commentary included. The novel and the Daily version are in a different order, because things like ships logs or diaries or letters might not be discovered until later in the novel, but are put in chronological order for the Daily. It is a different way to explore the same story.
I've long thought that Brunner's Stand On Zanzibar could be some kind of really interesting kind of interactive fiction project, with all the different kinds of media sources someohow made more literal than in the novel.
posted by hippybear at 1:30 PM on August 1, 2023 [4 favorites]
To be clear, I was referring to jacquilynne's comment about the criticism that takes a while to get written, i.e. usually after opening weekend has come and gone.
I care about high-quality film criticism, but I also enjoy partaking of the right kind of film with a high-energy crowd on opening weekend. These days, people aren't obliged to keep the genre side of their tastes on the DL to maintain their cred on the arthouse side!
posted by praemunire at 1:52 PM on August 1, 2023
I care about high-quality film criticism, but I also enjoy partaking of the right kind of film with a high-energy crowd on opening weekend. These days, people aren't obliged to keep the genre side of their tastes on the DL to maintain their cred on the arthouse side!
posted by praemunire at 1:52 PM on August 1, 2023
Great, dense, interesting article, Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon; thanks for posting it. I'm still sorting through the parts I agree with (I mean, influencers at pre-embargo screenings are about as low-hanging as fruit gets) and the parts I rolled my eyes over, but for now just wanted to say that the last 2 links in the piece ("some of the best film writing this year") are excellent evidence for her argument about what constitutes great film criticism - Stephanie Zacharek's smartly observant review of Barbie in Time and Richard Brody's quietly savage takedown of Oppenheimer in the New Yorker.
Anyway, I kinda feel like everyone in this thread should pay a film crit tax like we do in the puppy and kitten AskMes by posting a film critic or film site that you think lives up to Manuela Lazic's argument, like so:
Fritzi at Movies Silently is wonderful; she has amazing knowledge of silent-era films from all over the world, her reviews are incredibly informative, and she used to have a lot of fun annoying fans of the shithead racist D.W. Griffith on Twitter by carefully documenting that he didn't invent most of the film techniques he gets credit for inventing. Try Five Films Made Before 1910 That Deserve More Love or her fun review of the 1928 Tod Browning/Lon Chaney sleazefest West of Zanzibar, or her gush over Lilian Gish's The Wind.
Animation Obsessive. Deep dives into the history of the medium, great international scope, and current news. On Substack (many articles outside the subscription paywall) and Twitter.
Thomas Flight on YouTube, whose 14-min take on Nolan's bizarre sound design in Tenet was the most thoughtful and concise dissection I saw online.
posted by mediareport at 2:03 PM on August 1, 2023 [5 favorites]
Anyway, I kinda feel like everyone in this thread should pay a film crit tax like we do in the puppy and kitten AskMes by posting a film critic or film site that you think lives up to Manuela Lazic's argument, like so:
Fritzi at Movies Silently is wonderful; she has amazing knowledge of silent-era films from all over the world, her reviews are incredibly informative, and she used to have a lot of fun annoying fans of the shithead racist D.W. Griffith on Twitter by carefully documenting that he didn't invent most of the film techniques he gets credit for inventing. Try Five Films Made Before 1910 That Deserve More Love or her fun review of the 1928 Tod Browning/Lon Chaney sleazefest West of Zanzibar, or her gush over Lilian Gish's The Wind.
Animation Obsessive. Deep dives into the history of the medium, great international scope, and current news. On Substack (many articles outside the subscription paywall) and Twitter.
Thomas Flight on YouTube, whose 14-min take on Nolan's bizarre sound design in Tenet was the most thoughtful and concise dissection I saw online.
posted by mediareport at 2:03 PM on August 1, 2023 [5 favorites]
One person definitely keeping film criticism's vitality alive is Walter Chaw; if you are in search of talented and knowledgeable film critics online, you should check him out! Surprising he hasn't been mentioned yet...
posted by demonic winged headgear at 2:48 PM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by demonic winged headgear at 2:48 PM on August 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
I care about high-quality film criticism, but I also enjoy partaking of the right kind of film with a high-energy crowd on opening weekend.
I did say "most". 😁
posted by Greg_Ace at 3:03 PM on August 1, 2023
I did say "most". 😁
posted by Greg_Ace at 3:03 PM on August 1, 2023
Other film critics/commentators whose work I value: Whoever's writing at rogerebert.com, Norm Wilner, Harlan Ellison, the AV Club diaspora, Pauline Kael.
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 3:26 PM on August 1, 2023
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 3:26 PM on August 1, 2023
Scott Tobias and Keith Phipps, formerly of The Dissolve are doing good stuff at The Reveal.
Also, Reverse Shot.
posted by HumanComplex at 7:13 AM on August 2, 2023
Also, Reverse Shot.
posted by HumanComplex at 7:13 AM on August 2, 2023
> With so many more people writing about cinema online, fees for reviews have fallen to shockingly low levels and the expertise supposedly required of film critics has been forgotten – knowledge of the film history and good writing skills are less and less valued.
These influencer kids today don't even know classic Simpsons memes, like "Old Man Yells At Cloud" and "No, It's The Children Who Are Wrong."
posted by AlSweigart at 7:22 AM on August 2, 2023 [2 favorites]
These influencer kids today don't even know classic Simpsons memes, like "Old Man Yells At Cloud" and "No, It's The Children Who Are Wrong."
posted by AlSweigart at 7:22 AM on August 2, 2023 [2 favorites]
The bizarre juxtaposition of praising Pauline Kael for redeeming Bonnie and Clyde before pivoting to the implication that Hitchcock would have been overlooked without the intervention of French critics — Kael hated Hitchcock. There is a wealth of good, thoughtful criticism out there now, far more than there was when parochial tyrants at regional papers could impose their specific pet peeves on the public as arbiters of good artistic taste and you just had to go along with it. Even the historical greats had baffling, misguided, petty takes of films that are generally well-regarded today, and they didn't have the excuse of a Tweet's character limit.
This read like a bit of wringing of the hands about how tragic it is that TikTok has killed water-cooler talk about the TV programs on one of four available channels. Sure, maybe the days of having one nationally syndicated movie critic column in the paper have passed, but also, plenty of people either didn't read them or didn't care. That's the same today. People who care watch creators who give insightful commentary and filter out the influencers gushing to get access to screenings; everyone else is just as oblivious as all the people who went to whatever showed up at a matinee with a famous actor in it and never gave it a second thought.
posted by wakannai at 5:30 PM on August 3, 2023
This read like a bit of wringing of the hands about how tragic it is that TikTok has killed water-cooler talk about the TV programs on one of four available channels. Sure, maybe the days of having one nationally syndicated movie critic column in the paper have passed, but also, plenty of people either didn't read them or didn't care. That's the same today. People who care watch creators who give insightful commentary and filter out the influencers gushing to get access to screenings; everyone else is just as oblivious as all the people who went to whatever showed up at a matinee with a famous actor in it and never gave it a second thought.
posted by wakannai at 5:30 PM on August 3, 2023
« Older Bit Nap | The Historic Battles of “Hot Labor Summer” Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments