It is always true that a film can not make everyone happy. No matter how wonderful the writing, casting, acting, directing, and cinematography, there will be a critic that amidst the hoopla, hikes up his pants and yells “Stop!”. Take a film...your favorite film, the critics favorite film, the film that won Best Picture to wild acclaim, and I will show you a contrary voice.
I present the acclaimed motion picture “Chinatown”. Lauded by many as the “perfect film”, it has been a darling of critics and audiences since its release. In fact, it has only become more respected as time has gone by. Yet, of the 62 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, only 61 of them are positive. The legendary Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune was the lone voice of dissent. It is hard to imagine why anyone would give this film a negative review...which only proves the point.
The reality of review, be it of music, stage, screen, book, or video-game, is that the reviewer’s emotional engagement with the subject is partly responsible for his ultimate opinion. Until we are subjugated by the A.I. robots, there will be no completely objective review that takes into account the 349 exact factors which make a film “great”. Review is not a science, it is an art. To make it a science, we would have to remove humans from the equation. And really, who wants to read a review by a robot?
So, what makes a good reviewer? He must be dispassionate. Imagine if his film reviews were overly subjected to the whims of his emotional life. You have done it yourself. Look back and think of a film you loved because of the person with whom you sat and watched it. Of course, part of your love of that film was the film itself. You can not speak of this phenomenon in absolutes. However, some films, “Man of the House”, starring Chevy Chase, comes to mind, would require an overwhelmingly positive outside emotional event in order to achieve the status of a great film. Perhaps, while watching the film, if I had been making out with Kate Upton and had just received word that I won the Powerball jackpot, I MIGHT have felt differently.
Is that all that makes a good reviewer? No, he must be passionate! How can a film be great if it does not connect with the emotions of the human beings that watch it? Is there any point to art if we remove emotion from the equation? The central feature of what makes a film great MUST be the emotional impact it makes. One of my favorite films, “Once”, is so close to my heart because of the emotional impact of the main characters’ slow realization that they were falling in love. Of course, it’s all in the presentation. Clumsily done, a love story, thriller, or action movie can be unintentionally humorous. If you would like a wonderful example, I urge you to watch “The Room”...the best terrible movie you’ll ever see (with the possible exception of Troll 2).
So, dispassionate...and passionate. The reviewer must tread carefully. Know thyself. If you are aware of your emotions then it is easier to take them into account when analyzing the subject. Embrace your humanity and the logic of which you are fully capable. Only then will you be able to start the process of review in good faith.
The Phantom Menace was SO much better than Empire Strikes Back. Discuss...
No comments:
Post a Comment