Please, critics, write about the filmmaking

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

No, but the quality of such criticism is higher when you don't miss things as you inevitably would from the first viewing.

 

So does any criticism. You would be able to analyze a story or a character much better if you give yourself a month and a few more repeat viewings to think about it. That doesn't mean that you can't analyze them after one viewing. Same thing with cinematography and editing. Everything I mention about TWOWs comes from my first viewing of it. I shamefully have not seen it a 2nd time yet (though the DVD just came out, so we'll see). 

[Dark Jedi Master 007]

Yeah, I guess. I just wish I had an example of the kind of film criticism Seitz was complaining about, and whether he feels his demands should be applied to all movies, not just to popular and/or acclaimed titles. I just can't fault anyone for wanting to keep their blurbs on Bucky Larson or Battlefield Earth as short and to the point as possible.

Seitz could have given examples, I'll give you that.Listen, I have zero issue with a critic just saying "it sucks" to Battlefield Earth and moving on. But a lot of critics actually chose to comment on its story and its characters. Well, if you are going to go to the trouble of analyzing it, couldn't you include 1 or 2 sentences of its technique. Hell, in Nostalgia Critic's review of it (btw, I don't really consider him to be a critic as much of a comedian, but he fits as an example) he pointed out that the film camera was tilted for no good reason. You could mention that, say that it proves the filmmakers are incompetent and don't know anything about camera angles, and you would have made your point in one sentence. 

[Plain Old Tele]

Reviews of terrible movies can be fun and touch upon poorly-executed techniques

 

To convey the unnatural milieu of the Psychlos, he [Roger Christian] drenches some of their scenes in blue, some in green, and some in orange; others are lighted to look like '80s discotheques. His touch with actors is no less monochromatic. The scenes in which humans plot to recapture the planet have the ease and verisimilitude of re-enactments on America's Most Wanted. Visually, Battlefield Earth is a bewildering procession of non sequiturs, held together by the most assaultive soundtrack in cinema history.

 

That is not an overstatement. A horse hitting the ground sounds like a bomb going off. A bomb going off sounds like a planet exploding. A planet exploding sounds like—I'm out of hyperbole. People in the audience dig their fingers into their ears and howl in agony—it's a wonder the roof doesn't come down. Is this a Scientology strategy to drive the aliens out of their bodies?

 

(from David Edelstein's review of BATTLEFIELD EARTH)

[Deep Wang]

 

Joseph Kahn (he directed TORQUE, of all things) tweeted this:

 

  @JosephKahn

@mattzollerseitz @RennBrown The lack of critics promoting discussion also makes producers believe filmmaking language doesn't exist either.

3/24/14, 6:03 PM

 

  @JosephKahn

@mattzollerseitz @RennBrown Critics are crucial in the filmmaking ecosystem to protect and promote the artform.

3/24/14, 6:04 PM

 

 

That is because Torque and especially Detention are fucking awesome.

 

I really wish he'd make another feature already.

[Goffe]

I'd argue if a film is well made a movie can't be terrible. It doesn't have to be good but an understanding of film and filmmaking goes along way. 

 

Bryan Singer/JJ Abrams are both AMAZING filmmakers. Superman Returns for example or Star Trek both aren't the 2 most well loved films, but you can't watch those movies and tell me they aren't better made films then Non-Stop.

 

I may even enjoy a film like Non-Stop more but I find Superman Returns to be a much better made movie.

 

 

 

I'm not very good at making written points but if we had this conversation face to face i'm almost sure I could convince you. 

it is scary how much I agree with you