I liked John’s recent reposting about the Subjectivity of film. In it he talked about how the best part of films was that they were completely subjective. In a nutshell, John shared one tiny truth “You don’t have to like what I like”
I bring this up, as in a recent review I gave a poor rating to Terminator Salvation. In the comment section I was not met with discussion as much as I was challenged telling me I was “wrong” or incorrect in my evaluation. Unfortunately, my views on the film cannot be wrong unless you are suggesting that I am going out of my way to bad mouth a film I secretly found entertaining.
This is where a thin line is drawn between giving a review and giving an opinion. A review simply is at its core, an opinion. More importantly it is MY opinion. The difference in a review is that instead of just saying “I liked it” or “I didn’t like it”, I give a brief explanation about what bothered me.
I can’t go into a deep deconstruction of the film without offering up lots of spoilers, so my points (good and bad) will be spelled out as generally as I can. For those checking the review, I want to share my feelings without exposing too much of the film. But in that review I might say “It was all mindless potty humour” and that might be a negative to me, but then sharing that detail may be a positive to you. Maybe you LOVE a mindless potty humour spoof film. Great. You have gained something by my review despite my personal feelings on it.
But regardless of whehter my personal review of the film differs or lines up with other reviews online, the discussion then turned to you to disagree or agree with my assesment applying your own personal tastes and appreciation to the same subject. Discussion on the topic won’t change my review, you are simply sharing your own feelings on it.
Then there are those who feel that in some cases reviews have some ulterior motive. That’s the beauty of being a blogger and not a media journalist. I am a regular guy who gets the wonderful privilege of writing for you guys to talk about movies. I get a lot of perks that regular guys don’t get, but I am still just a regular movie patron with my own love of movies.
There is no ulterior motive. There can’t be. There is nothing to be benefited by us personally giving a positive or negative review. If I was asked or offered money by a studio to spin my review, you can be sure I would write a story exposing THAT instead.
Today I read an article of a person who’s review integrity I do question. New York Critic Armond White either has the most discriminating and random pallet for film, or he is making a name for himself by simply standing out of the crowd. Today he puts his accreditation on the line and gives a poor review of Up! previously holding a 100% at Rotten Tomatoes
The man that’s about to ruin the perfect score is New York critic Armond White, who just finished writing his negative review for “Up.” And this guy is no stranger to negative reviews, he previously trashed “The Wrestler,” “Star Trek,” “Milk,” “Slumdog Millionaire,” “The Dark Knight,” “Iron Man,” “There Will be Blood” and “Zodiac.” But “Bedtime Stories” got a thumbs up from him.
Now I am not saying that he HAS to agree with my assessment of those films, but it does seem suspect that he offers up negative reviews on the specific films that are getting attention for getting positive reviews.
I am not saying he couldn’t find those films unappealing. No film is ever perfect. Perfect for YOU maybe, but still not perfect. And I didn’t hate Bedtime Stories. Just convenient that every critically acclaimed film, he hates.
It sounds like he just wants to stand out as “the one guy” in these scenarios. I admit it is possible that he didn’t like those movies, but unlikely that NONE of them live up to the reviews they were getting in his eyes. This is why I presume that he has an ulterior motive. I am sure the publications that print his reviews get attention because of the controversy he offers up.
The one guy in the crowd that says “No” while hundreds say “Yes” will get attention.
One thing you can count on with our reviews here is that we are going to offer up our honest opinion. If John rates Wanted higher than Dark Knight, there is a reason. We will even tell you why. I won’t tell you that you are wrong for liking one film over another.
Film will always be a subjective art form, and that is probably a big reason why people love movies so much. Only arrogant people believe that their opinion is better than the opinion of someone else. Granted, people who are passionate about film and articulate while talking about it will be able to give a more informed opinion. However art is not something that can be qualified as being better or worse. Everything is just different.
sounds like that’s his game… write a crappy review about a good/great movie, everyone hears about it and wants to read it. his mission is accomplished. you’re talking about his review and giving him a lot of publicity whether it be good or bad.
And everyone talked about the Unibomber too. I guess he wins.
PLEASE don’t tell me he liked Disaster Movie.
Btw, he’s a critic, and he doesn’t like Oscar season? B/c he said “Forget that Oscar bait” dude Oscar season is the best time of the year!!
I am sorry but its ridiculous taht this armand guy who has been singled out like this for not liking UP.
he is getting attacked all over the place by people for not liking a film 99% of the attackers havent seen yet,
the almost religious fervor pixar brings out in people is getting stupid.
so he liked bedtime stories but not up….and the problem is???
he has only been brought to peoples attention because he was the first to give up a bad review…what a crime.
then people went trawling through his other reviews to point out that his review doesn’t matter because he liked this film and that film or that he didn’t like this film or that film.
but man i can’t believe the studid overreaction people have had to this guys review.
the funniest thing about it is as i said at the top of my post is the film is being defended by people who haven’t seen it yet so if anything their opinion on the film once they do see it to me will be more questionable because it appears to me they have already made up their minds that it is the best film of the year.
The problem is that Armond in general is just a bad critic. He regularly praises crap and thrashes films that are widely accepted to be good to the point where its just pathological. His sole purpose seems to be to drive down the ratings of praised movies and increase the ratings of panned movies.
Not just that, he spends most of his reviews attacking the people involved in the film and the actual people reading his review than talking about the movie itself.
Not to mention his extreme bias, once you’re on his shit list (such as David Fincher) then kiss away any chances of him giving you a fair review. On the other hand, if Jason Statham is in the film he’ll praise the crap out of it.
Another problem is that he compares films to other films which have no right to be considered a standard of any kind. For instance, in his review of Up he claimed that it failed to reach the heights of films such as Chicken Little. I’m pretty sure nobody can agree that Chicken Little was some kind of visionary animation standard.
His comparisons to other films in his reviews are often between completely unrelated movies. For instance, in his “Better than” list of 2008 he claimed that Rocknrolla was better than Slumdog Millionaire. What the hell do those films have in common that warrants any kind of comparison?
Also, let’s not forget some of his most infamous statements and some of my favorites:
Transporter 3
“Forget the Oscar bait, Transporter 3 is the only movie you need to see this season”
I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry
“It’s a modern classic”
If people were jumping all over him for being the only negative review then fine. You might have a point.
But if you read the article you would see that this guy is notorious for making shit up just to go against the flow. His reputation precedes him.
This is his way and the pros all know he will do it every time.
Up was just the final nail in the coffin. Armond has been criticized for a good while now far before 2009. To reiterate Rodney’s and SlashBeast’s points, its incredibly amazing how he hates EVERY critically acclaimed film while praising critically panned films.
There’s a reason we “worship” Pixar. They consistently put out great films that pretty much everyone agrees are great. As of yet, in an overall sense, they really haven’t made a “bad” movie.
“Some of those critics, WAY to (sic) critical…”
LOL
Right.
“Those athletes, WAY too athletic.”
“Those advisors, WAY too advisory.”
“Those musicians-”
Sorry. I had to. It’s in my contract.
Lol yes, I understand
well when one of the critics says about T4 “When is hollywood gonna learn to stop with time travel, it doesnt work well in this movie ” ITS FUCKING TERMINATOR…THE WHOLE GOD DAMN SERIES IS BASED ON TIME TRAVEL!
^ True.
Great article Rodney. Truthfully nobody is wrong in a review, because it’s there opinion. I might disagree with you ( I do sometimes) but I always enjoy the review(s). Again, great article. Btw who gives Milk, Slumdog, Dark Knight, bad ratings? Those were really good-GREAT movies, (with the exception of Slumdog, it was good but sorry guys I thought it was also very overrated) IMO of course. the difference between a review and an opinion is very slim you are correct.
Last time I checked RT, 5 minutes ago, UP was at 97%, there’s like 68 positive reviews to 2 negative ones, I just cannot wait for UP, preferably because it looks great, and all this best pic talk floating around….
Btw I agree Kristina, Ebert rocks, probably the best critic of all time. Some of those critics, WAY to critical, yeah I know it’s there job, but…you know. Anyway great article.
yes tons of people where wrong in the reviews…if you read some of them i highly think that they really never pay attention to what they watched..im not talking about this site cause i actually do believe that these are there honest opinions which i respect….but the fact is and none of u can deny ot, that there are some assholes out there that will not even pay attention about a movie and knock it cause they had the mindstate that it sucked b4 even watching it….critics are journalists too….to say there not is just not right….critics should be acountable just as someone giving bad weather predictions in some cases…blogs i tend to see them as a buddy saying a movie rocked or sucked…journalists i dont
Interesting review at MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30950508/
“For any run-of-the-mill movie studio, “Up” would represent a major achievement. But this is Pixar we’re talking about — and I would unhesitatingly place “The Incredibles” and “Toy Story 2” on my list of the greatest movies ever made by anyone, anywhere, anytime — and so the standards have to be a little tougher.
As it is, “Up” is certainly a solid B-lister for Pixar; not as great as the studio’s finest, perhaps, but still better than, oh, “Cars” or “A Bug’s Life.” All of which is to say that this new adventure is better than 98 percent of most American animated features. There’s just something about Pixar movies at their best that brings out the demanding Little League dad in me when their output falls just shy of its potential.”
There are some things that are bad, no matter how many people like them and vice verse. Like say The Dark Night, everybody loves the movie, but it’s not really THAT great.
One thing people have never understood is that you need to back opinions up just as much as you back facts up. Saying “I like X movie because I do” doesin’t cut it. You have to say “I like X movie because of Y”
Yes, it is THAT great.
I’m not denying that it was great, It’s a fantastic movie, but it’s not “The greatest bat man movie ever”, “The greatest crime drama ever”, “The greates super hero movie ever” etc etc/
Yes it is the greatest Batman movie ever and yes it is the greatest superhero movie ever.
I see there’s no reasoning with you than.
No. No there isn’t.
Because Prahanormal is the role model for reasonable.
Lol.
The diffrance is called objectivity vs personal prefrance.
Good post, Rodney, one of your best, I think. (even though I don’t agree with 100% of it)
I’d like to try and clear something up though. The other day we got into an arguement about whether or not a personal relationship with a filmmaker will alter the outcome of a review. We butted heads pretty hard on that one, and I brought up a comparison to Ben Lyons in one of my points. I just want to let it be known that I do not think you have any ulterior motives when reviewing, like Lyons or White may have. That was definately NOT my intent. I know you aren’t some sleazy guy looking for some sort of payoff and I’m sure you are a nice and upstanding guy. We just disagree a WHOLE lot. So yeah, just felt I needed to post that.
Also, Armond White, in my opinion of course, is the absolute WORST critic working today!!! I do have to say though, some of his articles are so ludicrous it’s kinda entertaining.
well ok your attacking him so will this post be taken down?
To me, a review is the same as an opinion we give our friends after watching a movie. “I liked/hated it, and here’s why”. The trick is learning whose opinion is worth listening to. Ebert is my go-to guy, although some of his reviews are puzzling to me, and I trust John, since I’ve noticed over the years that his taste in film is eerily similar to mine. We’ve given films identical scores numerous times, so if he hates something, it’s a good bet that I’m going to hate it, too.
John liked Twilight.
Just sayin.
There’s always an exception;)
I think I’m the only one who slightly agrees with Armond White’s review. His reviews make me think about the various aspects of the film he’s reviewing. Sometimes he makes valid points, but sometimes he comes off as an idiot. I can see how gave bad reviews to slumdog, dark knight. Wrestler, and trek. There were problems in those films that bothered me greatly. I liked wall-e up to the third act, but didn’t see what to big deal was. White generally hates pixar movies. But gave positive reviews to incredibles n ratatouile, so I don’t know what his deal is. His reviews are so unpredictable, so go figure.
Armond White is a douche. “Pixarism defines the backward taste for animation.” Whatever.
Yes, reviews are opinions. You don’t have to agree with them. I’m cool with that. A few summers ago I loved “Speed Racer” and didn’t like “Transformers.” 99% of movie going folks are the opposite. I agree 100% with Darth Mojo’s original Speed Racer review (worth the read):
That was a nice post Rodney.
I do not know if anyone has noticed this but Armond White is not the only negative review of “Up” on RT.com. Joe Morgenstern of the Wall Street Journal also is panning it
Its not about giving Up a bad review. Its about giving every single movie that gets critical acclaim
…a bad review
True dat, true dat, one of the reasons I never liked Derrida. I’m not afraid of what I will find, I just like doing all of that work.
When I go to the movies I want to be entertained. I’m not looking for the meaning of life.
There are books and then there is literature, along with moives and films and so on and so on. But who is to say which is which? There are those that will stand the test of time and those that will be forgotten before the end of the week.
I liked T4, it wasn’t the best, but I thought that it was better than T3. I read Rodney’s review and others, but I wasn’t influenced by them. I watched the movie, made my own opinion and came out with a higher score in my book. Some of the things that were talked about in those reviews I also saw in the movie and agreed with them. While other things I didn’t. A lot of the negative reviews got me thinking that, oh no its gonna be a bad movie, but it wasn’t.
secretly i thought catwoman was entertaining, but should have been a straight to dvd, and not called catwoman. since that name is associated with batman and that movie had nothing to do with batman. i also believe that the world is not going to end on dec 22nd 2012, and the movie that is coming out is going to be entertaining as the day after tomorrow. what does this have to do with anything, absolutely nothing.
I was critical of the editing on this site. Mainly, the major typos and posting of old news as new. And my criticisms were deleted.Shall I post the email flame wars you and I had?
But whatever Rodney, you are the most defensive person on this blog and cannot handle people criticisms of you. Ever single post has you defending something you said. Why not let people voice their opinions? Hmmmmm, Ironic, eh? Hey, I’m speaking Canadian!
As mentioned in plenty of those emails TVO, your criticisms were attacks. This is not up for debate and everytime you try to bring it up it will be removed.
Enjoy the site. If you just can’t deal with it, then go read someone else’s site.
And AGAIN TVo, we let people post their opinons all the time. Your presumption is still false.
i’ve had posts deleted from here as well, personally i don’t think they were attacks but rather opinions or feedback. i guess comments can be subjective also. i’m over it…
See, I’m not the only one. Are you that much of a control freak that you have to delete peoples posts?
There are rules in place and if posts were deleted it is because it violted those guidelines.
This is not up for debate.
My posts never get deleted and I disagree w/ John and Rodney on SEVERAL occasions.
I don’t think I’ve ever had posts deleted either and, believe me, Rodney and I have had some fiery disagreements.
Yes, at times I think he can be overly defensive (oddly enough, often when people agree with him) but i’ve never witnessed him delete a post because of it. I have, however, seen posts that explicitly break the rules be deleted. That’s just my personal observation though, I’m not policing this site 24/7.
just to clarify, rodney isn’t the only that can delete posts…
just sayin’ (sorry couldn’t help myself)
A long, long, time ago, in a galaxy not too far away…
I thought Rodney was full of it in two near back to back posts he did a few years ago. One was about ‘Species 4’. The other about ‘Quantum Of Solace’ (before the title was chosen). I told him so but I didn’t really attack him. I just thought he was nuts at the time.
In some of his later posts, I agreed with him (which some int’l friends ignored, thinking at the time that I blaze away at the guy every chance I got) and others I didn’t always agree.
To my knowledge, those early comments were never axed or edited.
well you deleted mine, all of them on the teminator review page…. “Then there are those who feel that in some cases reviews have some ulterior motive. That’s the beauty of being a blogger and not a media journalist. I am a regular guy who gets the wonderful privilege of writing for you guys to talk about movies.” and i never stated anything more then what u just wrote and said how(like u just said about the guy who did review on up)these are all opinions…i didnt attack u or anyone yet you felt u needed to take down my opinions…..hey opinions ae natural for leading the way to debate, now the whole thing i was trying to say in the comments was that if u read the CRITICS comments on RottenTomatos there are a lot of bashing for irrelevent reasons…like one noted person said that T4 was tired cause it delt with time travel…wtf thats what the series is derived from….sure take down the comments and come out with big section like this to back up yourself but the fact it u delete comments that are not intended any way as a attack but as a personal opinion about your opinions.
g8tor,
Just to clarify…I was talking about both John and Rodney in my comment.
@ Peter:
“I think movies are a little less subjective than you’ve implied and that there is such a thing as an irrefutably good movie.”
I agree completely.
You know, we’re not equal out here. SOMEBODY has to graduate at the bottom of their class. There is a ‘Bell curve’ when it comes to EVERYTHING in life. Not everyone’s opinion on any given subject is as qualified as everyone else’s. (This is presumed to be the case according to what I often refer to as the ‘proprietorial relationship’ filmgoers have with movies. And it’s simply not true.)
This is why I have long believed that, in the main, we can’t tell anyone whether something is ‘good’ or not, merely whether we liked it or not. However…
It would be ridiculous for me to debate the merits of, say, NFL football with a coach. Or a die-hard fan. Or a former player. I’m a casual observer. Of COURSE one of these people SHOULD be able to tell me whether one team is ‘better’ than another. (The ability to expound intelligently and successfully is, of course, another factor.) Same with architecture. Politics. Food. Cars. Fashion. Yes, subjectivity plays a big role. However, we seem to be very reluctant to, as the quote goes, ‘Render unto Caesar’. Ego plays a huge part in peoples’ ability -or lack thereof- of being able to cogently discuss.
I know this because I spend a lot of ‘gathering material time’ as a writer visiting various message boards. And from my vantage point, not passionately attached to most topics, that the percentage of people on average who hold what I refer to as a ‘qualified opinion’ is less than five percent. (This has nada to do with whether I agree with them.) Ignorance runs rampant out there. It boggles my mind endlessly.
What was that Mike Judge film…?
A review and opinion are exactly the same thing. You are saying why you liked or disliked a movie. Fairly simple really.
Both have the same result, but a review should offer some reasoning behind the formed opinion.
The only time I can’t stand reviews is when they criticize a movie for the wrong reasons.
Like when people say Crank was a bad movie because it lacks storyline and character development?
Or Transformers was bad because it wasn’t Citizen Cane
Hey LordThyBob,
But dude, what do you mean by “the wrong reasons”? Once again, that would be subjective.
If you say a movie has great action, but to me the action was lame… did I criticize the “wrong” thing?
What are the wrong reasons?
For a film that lacks in any real story, like Crank, but amps up the entertainment factor I have no problem with. If the film succeeds in entertain me for a couple of hours and isn’t trying to be anything else then I’m satisfied.
Some people don’t have patience for that type of stuff and let it be known that they don’t like “shallow” filmmaking. That’s their problem.
But sometimes, more often than not, films made for pure entertainment and nothing else even fail at that, like all the Epic Movies and shit like that.
I’ve seen people say that hated X-men 3 because, They killed Prof X or cause they made the mutants lose thier power
Just before the credits we see Magneto regaining his power and after the credits we see Professor X has found a way to survie.
Re: John Says
“But dude, what do you mean by “the wrong reasons”? Once again, that would be subjective. If you say a movie has great action, but to me the action was lame… did I criticize the “wrong” thing?”
I think he is speaking of the more obvious ‘wrong reasons.’ For example, criticizing Shoot ‘Em Up because it had over the top action when that is the point of the film.
Film critics are just as bad as Art Critics or music critics. The title should be “Movie Opinionator”.
Rodney, you may not open bash people but you do delete posts that you don’t agree with or are critical of you. We both know how many times you have deleted my posts that were critical of this blog. Mainly, the “This movie is gonna suck” posts that is commonplace here befor the movie even comes out. Twitch, AICN, IESB,Latinoreview, don’t not spend entire columns telling everybody why they think a movie will suck even before it comes out. That’s is not a “Movie Critics” job. So are you a blogger, critic or opinionator?
T-Vo, I do NOT delete posts simply for disagreeing with me. The rules are pretty straight forward and you have been explained this dozens of times. If I deleted everyone who simply disagreed with me, there would be half as many comments on this site. Stop tyring that assumption. It is not accurate at all and you know it.
If you want to disagree. That is fine. We actually encourage it. Your posts were NEVER deleted for simply disagreeing. Attacking is not tolerated, nor is it up for debate.
You made some good points, however, one thing that I think should be mentioned, if only to talk about it is the idea that with a film critic (that being someone who makes a living in your line of work) the idea is that you are able to give a ‘professional’ opinion on movies because likely you have seen more or know more about them than the rest of us.
It’s talked about in philosophy (i forget the philosopher)that in order to determine what is good art we need an ‘ideal critic’, which generally is someone who has seen in our case every movie of a certain genre or whatever and is able to give an expert opinion about it based on their knowledge. So although no one person can be right or wrong about their love or distaste for a movie, we turn to people who review films for a living to give us a more educated opinion. So in a sense like with your example of Armond Wright: a film critic, more than a normal person, could be wrong about a movie in an objective, professional sense if not otherwise.
I think movies are a little less subjective than you’ve implied and that there is such a thing as an irrefutably good movie.
There is a such thing as an irrefutably good movie TO YOU.
There is no such thing as an irrefutably good movie.
There can be a movie that is liked by SO many that you get the illusion that it is irrefutable, but that still does not place it above reproach.
There may be a movie that strikes a chord with you so deeply that it changes your life and others may share that feeling. However there is no guarantee that someone else might look at the same film and find it crap.
Dissecting and deconstructing a movie should be left to the professional, but that doesnt mean it is the only way to review a film.
Everytime you tell someone what you thought of a movie you are giving them a review. Professional or not.
The “Pros” are no different, but your approach to what they say might be different because of the standing they hold.
I agree Rodney, reviews are opinions, which is why I only look to a few to gauge what I might expect before going to see a movie, though I don’t always read reviews before a movie. I even like to read a few negative reviews to see if I agree with their assessment.
I read Armond’s review for UP and it reads more to me as if he doesn’t like anything fun and happy -makes you wonder if he kicks puppies (I kid). He actually is disgruntled about the formulaic storyline, which I can understand, but if it’s done well then isn’t there entertainment in that? I guess not for him.
What’s even sadder is that the day before his review was posted I was reading comments on RT under Ebert’s review and a ton of people were already predicting that Armond would be the first to give UP a bad review because he is typically among the group who hates the critically acclaimed movies.
When John’s movie is finished, I don’t imagine he would review it himself. If you were to review it do you think you might be a little bias?
And Armond White gave a positive review to dance flick.
I have seen John’s film. And when it is released I could review it, but unless I give a negative review, no one would believe me anyways.
As a member of The Movie Blog, and the mere fact that my name is in the credits, I could hardly be expected to review the film.
Its just a conflict of interest.
pretty much
You bring up a good point. Films ultimately are subjective and everyone isn’t going to like the same thing. I get met with hostility whenever I say I don’t like Star Wars (yes, even the old ones) but that’s just my opinion. Some people become really defensive. If you wanna see some hysterical arguing and insult exchanges. Go to IMDB and look up the messahe boards for anything quentin tarantino and Watchmen. It’s insane how opinionated people are and feel as though if you like it, you’re a “fanboy” and if you don’t like it, “you didn’t get it and you’re retarded” it’s insane.
The point of reviews is to give enough so people can trust you and say
“Well, John liked TDK and The Wrestler, and so do
i, so im going to trust his G.I. Joe review to see if ILL see it or not since we seem to like the same stuff”
or
“Rodney hated star wars and transformers so i will not trust his Star Trek review”
Or whatever, these are examples^^^
Reviews are SUPPOSED to be your opinion, once people know what you do/dont like, theyll read your reviews to see if theyll watch the movie or not
And ill say something about your last 3 paragraphs Rodney, The guy obviously wants attention, but dont you sometimes find yourself saying:
“What!? how can you guys like that movie!? That was so bad!” I say that about Bladderunner
or
“That movie fucking RULED! How do you guys not like it?” Thats me with Spiderman 3
You go find an example of me attacking a person for liking a movie.
I will wait here.
Thats why I go on TMB, I agree with 95% of your reviews so before i watch a movie ill usually check out the review because i usually trust your reviews (NOT YOUR T4 ONE THOUGH!)
And youre not biased because I can quote John saying “This movie will suck” and then later admitting it was good (Punisher, TNMT) and thats why I trust these reviews, unlike that fucking dumbass thats giving UP! a bad review. Hes biased towards good movies, you dont want to read reviews from biased people
Rodney
What? I never said you attacked people for liking a movie….
You asked me if I find myself saying “how do you guys not like it?”.
No. I never bash a person for liking something I don’t. I can disagree saying “that ruled” or “that was so bad” but I am directing those assessments at the film, not the person.
Oh I see, no what I meant to say is if you ever found yourself liking a movie everyone else hated. But you found that movie to be really good
Like you go see X movie and its really good but your whole family hates it and youre like “woah, thats weird, I freaking loved it”
“How do you guys not like it?” wasnt my way of showing an attack, it was my way of saying “I thought youd like it, am i the only one that DID like it? damn!”
To show an attack towards disagreement I would quote some of the things I do read sometimes such as:
“Youre wrong, that movie was good” or “Youre an idiot for liking spoof movies!” or “Youre gay for liking twilight!”
The only review I trust is my own personal experiences. Other reviews are just something to compare my personal experiences too. How am I going to rely on somebody else to tell me what I like? We may have some things in common in relations to likes and dislikes, but there are bound to be differences as well.
I’ll listen to a review, but it won’t effect whether or not I like or want to see the film or not….I’ll make that decision myself.
…and the only time I have another person’s opinion affect mine was w/ T4 and thats b/c I was able to notice more problems I had w/ it.
I disagree. Personally I don’t really care about an analysis. I want to get a feel for the movie by hearing opinions from people I know, or people who I have a feel for. I get a better gauge for the film that way.
There is an infinite amount of content on the internet = an infinite amount of opinion/reviews on film.
What I find more valuable is actual analysis – ‘reviews’ that explore the meaning of films/deconstruct how they’re made or what they’re trying to say – even if it’s on an unconscious level.
And a person who craves those sort of things will seek out that type of review.
Our reviews are not done with a degree in Film in our pockets nor do we claim to. I offer insight when I see it, but I am going to rate a film based on how much I enjoy it.
I enjoyed the CRAP out of Transformers, but if I was to deconstruct every scene and dissect every moment, I likely wouldn’t. Its like talking yourself OUT of liking something.
I call it like I see it. I typically have my review worked out in my head before I even arrive home, sometimes before I get to the car.
And yet, I believe film becomes at least a little less subjective when you dissect it piece by piece and look at how it works. Any storyline can ultimately be divided down to a series of diagrams and numbers. Of course, film becomes a little more complicated in that it’s very visual, and has actors and effects.
In any case, i believe that deep down we all look for the same general types of things in movies, to an extent. That’s why they work. So clearly there is some objectivity.
As someone else mentioned in the comments in John’s post, my Top 10 Greatest Films list would vary quite a lot from my Top 10 Favorite Films list.
The reviews that you find on a site such as Midnight Eye, although focusing on Japanese films, are what I would call a ‘real’ review: a critique of the film, it’s meaning and the emotions/thoughts it inspires. Reviews on, say, Twitch or The Movie Blog are more opinions with a score at the end.
This is in no way to bash TMB or Twitch. For the information I need (Is a film good? Why is it good / not good? What’s it’s score out of 10?), they are usually more useful to me. But when I want an in-depth consideration of a film, which may not even tell me whether it’s good or not, I like a Midnight Eye style review.
Either one, I feel, is valid.
(As for the example of Terminator Salvation, which I saw on Monday, I enjoyed it and would give it a solid 6 out of 10. But then, I don’t worship the franchise (I pretty much cringe at parts of T2, but love the original). Same reason I could say AVP2 did what it said on the tin… I stopped worshiping after Alien Resurrection.)