In Reply to: A critic's job.... posted by mkuller on January 5, 2006 at 14:57:00:
"...is to critique and judge on artistic merits, not on "entertainment value"."Which artistic merit -- the "I think this is great art therefore it is" or the "I think there is no artistic value in Jurassic park therefore Ebert's not a real critic"
In fact Jurassic Park has an incredible amount of artisitic merit - visuals, sound effects, set design. All artistic merits. The visual impressiveness of this film is better than any non Hollywood film in existence. One could easily make the case that it is "artistically superior" to anything before 1980. Or umm Star Wars or Lord of the Rings.
None of these are on my top 100 list though because I, like Aristotle, do no put a major importance - or any importance - on a spectacle - Aristotle was primarily about Plot and secondly Character study. He was referring to the play but film is the closest thing - a much inferiror thing but close.
People go to movies to be entertained -- I go to an art film and a documentary and I still want to be entertained -- if a film does not entertain me then it gets a thumbs down because it failed to do what a film is suppose to do - entertain.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: A critic's job.... - RGA 17:48:50 01/05/06 (0)