Does it matter who criticizes movies? How about Kevin Smith's plan of simply handing out free tickets to the public and seeing what they think? What do you think?

Tagged with:

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments.

  • Comment number 95. Posted by I_am_I

    on 27 Aug 2010 20:54

    M Knight Shyamalan....Why do you people insist on giving this guy a chance? He's been doing films for TEN YEARS. He's not an amateur who has just come on the scene and whom therefore one might forgive the occasional faux pas. Nine out of ten of his films have FLOPPED, or have done little at the box office. Surely that tells you something? HE'S PANTS! His successes have been entirely be accident! He practices incompetence and mediocrity. (ANYONE who can go and say "one to see The Last Airbender, please" without laughing is a better person than I).

    Honestly, if this were any other business people would be telling this idiot to quit!

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 95: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 95: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 94. Posted by information1st

    on 27 Aug 2010 19:25

    I feel for m night shyamalan: I really appreciated watching The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, The Village. I have not seen the others.

    I really thought this was a film director who had a something different from most Hollywood directors. It would be great to see an interview with him.

    Critics definitely have a place, in fact the rotten tomatoes Top Critics is an excellent example of this adjacent to the user reviews and the public voting with their wallets.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 94: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 94: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 93. Posted by antimode

    on 10 May 2010 02:13

    Would it be mean to say I would rather see a Kevin Smith film than one of yours?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 93: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 93: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 92. Posted by Dave Granger

    on 10 May 2010 00:33

    Would it be mean to say that Smith has trouble giving away tickets to his films these days?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 92: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 92: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 91. Posted by Andre Allahverdi

    on 14 Apr 2010 04:18

    A good example of a film that needed critics to help it as advertising didn't

    The Shawshank Redemption

    need I say more.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 91: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 91: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 90. Posted by FriskyDingo

    on 9 Apr 2010 16:21

    Being a critic of any sort of artistic medium is always going to conjure up feelings of loathing from the artists; they may even respond to critics, "you're jealous and bitter that you can not create art", which is nonsense.

    In Kevin Smiths case this anger, disregard, even hatred of critics, has only become more prominent now because even the 'fans' of his work, who stood by him before (even through 'Jersey Girl') have dismissed 'Cop Out' as a bad film.
    Kevin now blames critics for the poor response to his film, concluding the critics were the influence or catalyst for the publics dislike of his film, but a lot of punters don't listen or read reviews before going to films. So the negative opinion of his film was untampered by critics and actually the view of the general public, the people he wants to hand out tickets too. He doesn't want honest opinions, he wants positive ones.

    But can critics become too personal when delivering their opinions? Should there be some restraint?
    A good documentary film on this subject is 'Heckler'.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 90: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 90: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 89. Posted by Mark Hudson

    on 8 Apr 2010 11:57

    The main problem with Kevin Smith's argument is that individuals tend to seek out and watch only a limited number of films, based on their existing likes and dislikes. Critics, however, watch a much broader range of films, simply because it's their job to do so. They, therefore, have a much more informed opinion on films generally, as well as a more developed knowledge of the history of cinema. I wouldn't feel comfortable criticising any art form as a whole, unless I'd put in the time and study to make a worthwhile contribution.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 89: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 89: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 88. Posted by jthecrab

    on 8 Apr 2010 11:52

    Hello Mark, hope you are enjoying your break. I just wanted to ask your opinions on a subject which has bothered me for some time. Like yourself I am not interested in watching anything that depicts actual cruelty against children or animals. That being said, since I've not heard or read anything from you on the matter, with the imminent release of "The Ghost" I wanted to know how you feel about watching the films of Roman Polanski, a man who pleaded guilty to an act of paedophilia and who spent over 30 years effectively on the run for his crime.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 88: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 88: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 87. Posted by Rupert Burgess

    on 7 Apr 2010 17:34

    If Kevin Smith is really that bothered by critics, he could eliminate at least one from the running by making 10 films in a year worse than Bride Wars!
    It's a tough challenge but all he needs to do is commit professional suicide and drop his standards completely. The tricky part is getting the backing for each consecutive rubbish movie.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 87: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 87: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 86. Posted by BillPaxtonsSecondBiggestFan

    on 7 Apr 2010 17:04

    Critics are there to get people talking. Whether they are do this by being overly brash (Kermode), intrinsically diplomatist (Ebert), painstakingly geeky (Newman) or even generously lenient (Collins) that's all down to their own personal style. But a critic should be able to make a good argument and let the debate unfold. 1000 members of the public aren't going to get people talking because mostly their opinions wont go beyond, "Yeah it was alright" or, "Nah, it was a bit pants."

    A good film critic should be the sort of person that can walk into a room, make a concrete proclamation on a film and then, one minute later, be able to leave to the sound of everyone in there arguing amongst themselves about said film.

    P.S: On the point of Dr K repeating himself in his book, it's not a completely unfounded criticism. The amount of times you used the advert "studiously" was borderline maddening.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 86: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 86: 0
    Loading…
More comments

More Posts

Previous

Next