4/27/2024 0 Comments Panda iii menu![]() ![]() ![]() Because they don't care! OK, if The New York Times is at my disposal then I’ll open it, read it, but that's it. I'm told, "Manohla Dargis, she's excellent." But when I ask what are the three movies she loved and the three she hated in the last few years, no one can answer me. I am told: “There are still good critics.” And I always answer: who? I say this without sarcasm. Is it my fault? Theirs? What remains are website names: CinemaBlend, Deadline. This past June, Quentin Tarantino gave his two cents about modern-day film criticism, which he believes has no identity and has kept him out of the loop on who writes what: I’ll go one step ahead of Ellis and add that, with the advent of Twitter, film criticsm is now a hybrid of influencers, bloggers and actual critics. Ditto “ Evil Dead Rise” which I saw for 30 minutes, 83%, high for a horror film. Ditto “ Creed III,” 88%, which I watched 20 minutes of. Really? 99% of you top critics listed on Rotten Tomatoes actually liked “ Are You There God, It’s Me Margaret?” Which I bought because of that 99% I turned this cutesie adaptation off after 15 minutes at a cost of $5.99. A long time ago, reading reviews of movies that had just opened and that I hadn’t seen, often influenced me on what movies to see first or what movies to ignore, but I’ve been burned so many times in the past decade or so by the advanced critical consensus of the entertainment press, that I now just navigate on certain friends’ recommendations or who directed it or the subject matter.Ĭritics don’t guide me in the ways they used to. I read far less reviews than I used to unless I’ve already seen the movie and then, and only then, I’ll scan the top critics on Rotten Tomatoes and read the reviews of the critics that interest me. On his July 10 podcast, he had an amusing rant about how he doesn’t trust 99% of today’s film critics: One person who shares my negative views on today’s film criticism is Brett Easton Ellis. This means that’s it’s much easier for studios to lure them into their little marketing web. Sure, there are still some who make a living doing it, but they are very far and few. However, based on what I’ve seen, the democratization of the profession has also led to a watering down of the field.įilm criticism is still a profession, but it's no longer an occupation. His view was that never before have more critics written about films. Of course, at the end of the spectrum, you had Roger Ebert referring to the internet-age as “the golden age for film criticism”. They are too often, he said, in a “sinister symbiotic relationship with the studios and are "quote whores," providing good taglines for the posters and trailers.” Prominent film historian, and blogger/critic, Jonathan Rosenbaum, once trashed modern-day reviewers of film as the cheerleaders and Pied Pipers of the film industry. ![]() There are just too many “critics” on that site, and they too easily dish out fresh reviews. It’s come to the point where RT has become so meaningless in deciphering what’s good and what’s bad that it’s just flat-out untrustworthy. Also, if you had any further reason not to trust Rotten Tomatoes, it has an 75% over there. The embargo has indeed lifted on “Kung-Fu Panda 4” and it currently has a 53 on Metacritic (based on 15 reviews). It’s projected to have a $50+M debut at the box-office, which is in desperate need of more hits, so I’m not complaining. I’m not sure why I decided to go and watch “Kung-Fu Panda 4,” since I’m not a fan of the series, but I did and, unsurprisingly, found it to be a real bore. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |