I love this piece. You have no idea how many times I talk movies with a friend and get hit with "Well Rotten Tomatoes says that it's bad" and I just completely disengage from the conversation... you are the judge, don't let the algorithm tell you what you should like and not like! We would be living in such a boring world if we all loved the same things.
I'm of the notion that there's an audience for every, single bit of cinema released. I never pan a film, but also try to feature those that move me and speak to themes I'm passionate about. The best thing about art is that it's so varied and inconsistent. I hope it always remains that way and that creatives find ways to buck tradition, around the loudest critics and into the hearts and minds of those in search of their particular vision of this circus we call life. I know some of my favorites would be considered real stinkers if judged by some of the most discerning voices in the arena. Great read, thanks for sharing.
I disagree wholeheartedly, rotten tomatoes and letterboxed (to a lesser extent) is ruining it. Because, there are no critics on par with Gene Siskel, Roger Ebert, or Pauline Kael. They are NOT students of film. Or even really film lovers. Think about the Numbers. Rotten Tomatoes rates something on the basis of about 200 “Critics” mostly from obscure websites nobody’s heard of, and 200 average basement dwellers who are evidently the basis of Cecily Strong’s character on SNL “The Drunk Girl at a Party Who You Wish You Hadn’t Started a Conversation With”. We’re sort of saying the same thing, But, where you and I differ is I think you forget that Film Criticism used to be More of an art form a Champion of the New as the Critic in “Ratatouille” said. Scorsese would have never had the career he did if it weren’t for Pauline Kael. So, when Film Criticism rises to the Art form it once was, we maybe could listen to someone or anyone at all. What we need is Filmmakers Daring enough to start putting in their contracts to never ever again list their Rotten Tomatoes score in advertising their movies. And, maybe screen blurbs also. Remember Hellraiser Stephen King quote “I have seen the future of horror, and it is Clive Barker” maybe just get quotes from other writers and filmmakers who are respected, and Nothing from “Critics” until they step up their game. Letterboxed is okay, bc that’s mostly about Film Fandom, and not really to be taken as holy writ. Just Opinions. Like you said. I’m taking even your opinion with a grain of salt. You think the Greatest Film of all time is “Jaws”, a movie that I love but it doesn’t make it the Best. The claim to the title of the Greatest Film Of All Time? Obviously, 🙄 It’s a Tie Between “Fight Club” and the 1990’s Version of “A Little Princess”
Appreciate the convo Jeff. I don't agree with some of your points but that's OK. I don't think any critic or anyone is the definitive "truth" but I don't hold someone's opinion who rarely watches movies the same as someone who watches a ton and knows more about cinema. I would hold the same perspective on sports, food, any hobby. I see movies as a lot more than simply entertainment. Kids movies too. I can be entertained by something that doesn't have much substance. Eating a perfectly grilled steak is not the same as carnival fried dough, but they both are food and both might fill you up for a brief time. I hold movies to a higher standard. I also believe that personal enjoyment and preference are not equivalent to quality- I can knowingly like a bad movie, as well as acknowledging how a very good movie wasn't for me. Also - While I acknowledge many issues with Solo, it was a lot better than how you're describing it. Donald Glover was amazing. The train robbery was fun and thrilling. I have it ranked above the atrocious ep. 9, Attack of Clones, and about even with Phantom Menace with my Star Wars rankings. Nothing is worse than ep. 9. Woody Harrelson is always entertaining.
Sometimes critics are a bit too critical. Almost every movie has its good or bad sides and I feel like many movie critics zoom in on the "bad" things and leave out the good because they "just didn't like it"
Jeff, I hear you on not getting offended, but it's also important to recognize that art impacts culture, perspectives, it is downstream of politics. Movies don't exist in a vacuum. I would want to watch a movie to determine how/why it may have a problematic message, but that's different than they're just neutral and that criticism of said art isn’t important in the context of what values, themes, perspectives the movie is showing or not showing. This could be gender roles, economics, military actions etc. Birth of a Nation is an important film in the history of movies but its also horrible racist propaganda that should be acknowledged any time its brought up.
Of course. That’s the context of the movie that I’m talking about. But it also doesn’t offend me that it exists and I don’t think it should be deleted forever - we just need context and judge it based on that. It’s a horrible message, from a terrible time period, but also one of the most impressive movies for its time.
Definitely need to call it out and recognize the horrific message. 100%
Great article! I agree that we should expect movies to either entertain or expand your knowledge. But I'm not sure if most movies are doing that from a generational standpoint. The cynical new Hollywood era gave away to entertaining and optimistic blockbusters. And those gave way to franchises. I'm not sure if franchises lend themselves to your criteria of "good movies". I'm also skeptical that a lot of the published critics want their knowledge expanded as much as that they want the messaging of newer movies to affirm their beliefs. For example, Dog Day Afternoon is a morally ambiguous movie and I would wager it would be considered problematic now. Modern critics would assuredly want to fix that movie.
with such depth and encouraging words that give ME (and others) HOPE for the critical thinker, beginner to pro (watcher, reviewer, writter, etc.) AND the fun-loving fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants movie goer that just wants to ENJOY a movie without any pressure and judgement... THAT GIVE ME HOPE!!!
I tip my hat to you and I not only read your words but I felt them.
Disclaimer: I have not read the article yet. Film Critics helped curate my love of movies. Siskel and Ebert pointed me to so many gems and helped introduce me to cinema my teenage self never would have discovered at the video store on my own.
I used to love watching Siskel and Ebert back in the day. They gave real in depth reviews. I remember Ebert totally loving the film Dark City and put it on the top of his best of the year list. Based on his glowing review I went to see it and it is one of my all time favorite films. So unusual, unique and beautifully shot in a noir format.
I love this piece. You have no idea how many times I talk movies with a friend and get hit with "Well Rotten Tomatoes says that it's bad" and I just completely disengage from the conversation... you are the judge, don't let the algorithm tell you what you should like and not like! We would be living in such a boring world if we all loved the same things.
I'm of the notion that there's an audience for every, single bit of cinema released. I never pan a film, but also try to feature those that move me and speak to themes I'm passionate about. The best thing about art is that it's so varied and inconsistent. I hope it always remains that way and that creatives find ways to buck tradition, around the loudest critics and into the hearts and minds of those in search of their particular vision of this circus we call life. I know some of my favorites would be considered real stinkers if judged by some of the most discerning voices in the arena. Great read, thanks for sharing.
I disagree wholeheartedly, rotten tomatoes and letterboxed (to a lesser extent) is ruining it. Because, there are no critics on par with Gene Siskel, Roger Ebert, or Pauline Kael. They are NOT students of film. Or even really film lovers. Think about the Numbers. Rotten Tomatoes rates something on the basis of about 200 “Critics” mostly from obscure websites nobody’s heard of, and 200 average basement dwellers who are evidently the basis of Cecily Strong’s character on SNL “The Drunk Girl at a Party Who You Wish You Hadn’t Started a Conversation With”. We’re sort of saying the same thing, But, where you and I differ is I think you forget that Film Criticism used to be More of an art form a Champion of the New as the Critic in “Ratatouille” said. Scorsese would have never had the career he did if it weren’t for Pauline Kael. So, when Film Criticism rises to the Art form it once was, we maybe could listen to someone or anyone at all. What we need is Filmmakers Daring enough to start putting in their contracts to never ever again list their Rotten Tomatoes score in advertising their movies. And, maybe screen blurbs also. Remember Hellraiser Stephen King quote “I have seen the future of horror, and it is Clive Barker” maybe just get quotes from other writers and filmmakers who are respected, and Nothing from “Critics” until they step up their game. Letterboxed is okay, bc that’s mostly about Film Fandom, and not really to be taken as holy writ. Just Opinions. Like you said. I’m taking even your opinion with a grain of salt. You think the Greatest Film of all time is “Jaws”, a movie that I love but it doesn’t make it the Best. The claim to the title of the Greatest Film Of All Time? Obviously, 🙄 It’s a Tie Between “Fight Club” and the 1990’s Version of “A Little Princess”
Appreciate the convo Jeff. I don't agree with some of your points but that's OK. I don't think any critic or anyone is the definitive "truth" but I don't hold someone's opinion who rarely watches movies the same as someone who watches a ton and knows more about cinema. I would hold the same perspective on sports, food, any hobby. I see movies as a lot more than simply entertainment. Kids movies too. I can be entertained by something that doesn't have much substance. Eating a perfectly grilled steak is not the same as carnival fried dough, but they both are food and both might fill you up for a brief time. I hold movies to a higher standard. I also believe that personal enjoyment and preference are not equivalent to quality- I can knowingly like a bad movie, as well as acknowledging how a very good movie wasn't for me. Also - While I acknowledge many issues with Solo, it was a lot better than how you're describing it. Donald Glover was amazing. The train robbery was fun and thrilling. I have it ranked above the atrocious ep. 9, Attack of Clones, and about even with Phantom Menace with my Star Wars rankings. Nothing is worse than ep. 9. Woody Harrelson is always entertaining.
Sometimes critics are a bit too critical. Almost every movie has its good or bad sides and I feel like many movie critics zoom in on the "bad" things and leave out the good because they "just didn't like it"
Jeff, I hear you on not getting offended, but it's also important to recognize that art impacts culture, perspectives, it is downstream of politics. Movies don't exist in a vacuum. I would want to watch a movie to determine how/why it may have a problematic message, but that's different than they're just neutral and that criticism of said art isn’t important in the context of what values, themes, perspectives the movie is showing or not showing. This could be gender roles, economics, military actions etc. Birth of a Nation is an important film in the history of movies but its also horrible racist propaganda that should be acknowledged any time its brought up.
Of course. That’s the context of the movie that I’m talking about. But it also doesn’t offend me that it exists and I don’t think it should be deleted forever - we just need context and judge it based on that. It’s a horrible message, from a terrible time period, but also one of the most impressive movies for its time.
Definitely need to call it out and recognize the horrific message. 100%
Gen Z rejects critics with a “let people enjoy things” ethos so you have an overabundance of slop tbh. Critics hold zero relevance nowadays
Great article! I agree that we should expect movies to either entertain or expand your knowledge. But I'm not sure if most movies are doing that from a generational standpoint. The cynical new Hollywood era gave away to entertaining and optimistic blockbusters. And those gave way to franchises. I'm not sure if franchises lend themselves to your criteria of "good movies". I'm also skeptical that a lot of the published critics want their knowledge expanded as much as that they want the messaging of newer movies to affirm their beliefs. For example, Dog Day Afternoon is a morally ambiguous movie and I would wager it would be considered problematic now. Modern critics would assuredly want to fix that movie.
Darth Maul is the best Star Wars character imho
It's people like YOU...
with such depth and encouraging words that give ME (and others) HOPE for the critical thinker, beginner to pro (watcher, reviewer, writter, etc.) AND the fun-loving fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants movie goer that just wants to ENJOY a movie without any pressure and judgement... THAT GIVE ME HOPE!!!
I tip my hat to you and I not only read your words but I felt them.
Thank you kindly, Sir (two thumbs up)
Disclaimer: I have not read the article yet. Film Critics helped curate my love of movies. Siskel and Ebert pointed me to so many gems and helped introduce me to cinema my teenage self never would have discovered at the video store on my own.
All of this.
Hard agree. Loving loving things seems to be disappearing, and I’m sick of it.
Love this take - and I’m the same way! I’ll watch anything and usually like it 🤣🤷♂️
I used to love watching Siskel and Ebert back in the day. They gave real in depth reviews. I remember Ebert totally loving the film Dark City and put it on the top of his best of the year list. Based on his glowing review I went to see it and it is one of my all time favorite films. So unusual, unique and beautifully shot in a noir format.
I've been saying there are no bad movies, just boring or non-boring. Great piece.