|
Films/DVD Asylum Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star. |
|
|
|
Films/DVD Asylum Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star. |
|
In Reply to: "...second rate reviewers and glorified bloggers..." -That's a bit harsh, don't you think? posted by Audiophilander on July 13, 2005 at 21:55:16:
RT is to film criticism as White Castles are to filet.Have you really looked at some of these folks' sites and mags? So they're in print - so what?
Cream of the Crop are legit, as are the serious film writers of many major papers and mags. I also have respect for online mags like Slate and Salon as well as online reviewers like James Bardinelli, MaryAnn Johanson et al.
But RT still includes too many marginal reviewers for me to find the place useful. Theres still too many quick review types and fanboys - no way they're "critics" - you have to produce "critical" writing to be to earn that title, you can't just hammer out instant consumer guide capsules or off the cuff opinion. If these types aren't second rate, then they're third rate or worse. Some of the self-published, genre oriented web sites are a joke. I say this as someone who used to pen film reviews for weeklies and monthlies - I see a lot of poor writing and lack of knowledge amongst the host at RT, and no discrimination between the good writers and the wannabes. Probably 30% of those so called scribes wouldn't know the Rules of the Game from Rules of Engagement. .
Moreover, simply noting a film's fresh or rotten rating, while it may be fun, tells me NOTHING about the film itself. Can you imagine the tomatometer rating for say...Eraserhead???? RT never influences whether I would see a film or not, mainly because the fresh/rotten leaves too much out of the equation.
The pass/fail ratings, along with the marginal critics, just doesn't cut it for me. I tend to know something about most movies coming out, and I read 4-5 critics I trust to get a feel fpor the ones I'm unfamiliar with. Most times, my desire to see a movie is based on the filmmakers themselves as well as buzz from festivals and fans, so I usually know what I want to see...or not see.
Your example of WOTW vs F4 is a case in point. Yes, WOTW is a better film and it's well crafted, but it;s no masterpiece. F4 isn't that bad - although it's not very good, it's far less offensive than many films with much higher RT ratings.
If you feel you must use a guide for selecting films, Metacritic is better than RT.
May I suggest, if you like movies, develop your own critical thinking about the flickers based on a variety of sources. RT can be fun, but recognize it for what it is: info to share around the water cooler.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Nope. - Harmonia 01:02:25 07/14/05 (3)
- What about - RGA 23:17:17 07/15/05 (0)
- "May I suggest, if you like movies, develop your own critical thinking..." - What makes you think I don't? - Audiophilander 09:44:42 07/14/05 (0)
- Reviews should be read (anyway in full) only *after* seeing the movie. nt - clarkjohnsen 07:35:38 07/14/05 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
