|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.235.255.61
In Reply to: what makes any critic a fricken expert? posted by BJordan on February 8, 2007 at 18:53:28:
clear several hurdles. First off, someone must be paying to read their opinions or their work would be terminated. Second, an editor must have decided at some point that the critic has strong opinions, well bolstered by logic, and that he can express them clearly and entertainingly. In order for the critic to be taken seriously, he must have encyclopediac knowlege of film and formal film criticism.
Last, of course, is whether or not the person has a more elusive quality: taste. It is what distinguishes a connoisseur in many fields.
If I read you correctly, your objections to critics equally could apply to pretty much any artist: hell, anyone is qualified to throw paint upon a canvas, film his "vision," or cook up a fancy meal.
Yes, I mean what I am implying, tacitly. Film criticism, like all serious criticism of the arts, may be elevated to art itself.
Follow Ups:
There HAS to be more to it than just being published.
someone who puts thereself into a public position of opinions needs to be looked at precisely like what you say. They are giving their own taste or personal take on something (no matter what it is) and to me it is nothing more then that. I have no problem with someone giving an opinion on something, what bothers me sometime is the absoluteness that many of these criticics take in there comments. That was what I was trying to say. Thats all.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: