Nerdrotic doesn't like it, which makes me want to see it even more.
I have never watched a YouTube movie review in my life. It’s baffling to me that people use any of them to determine what they see. More so that they are famous themselves and part of the discussion. From the reactions I read on this stuff, any movie, the opinions are shaped by getting attention.
Someone has a YouTube video to make and countless followers. Filling a review video is what they are thinking about the whole time watching anything. They have a mental checklist of whether it meets their demands. Obviously this is not limited to videos. But written ones too. Please me or I am angry. Particularly with existing franchises.
So now it's Riddler as in "riddle with bullets?"
That kind of close-mindedness is a weird thing to flaunt. Christy Lemire, for one, has a long career as a professional film critic for the Associated Press. You're obviously entitled to say that your opinions are the only person's opinions that matter to you, but I assure you, your opinions are not so special that anyone else here should care what you think for the single reason you don't post reviews to YouTube.
They should do exit interviews.
"So what made you decide to see this?"
"Nerdrotic."
"People keep saying that!"
To really engage on that level, you really have to go see the movie. So you're having an educated conversation.
A critic can bring up information and viewpoints in their review that have value even to those who will never see the movie. I am not sure if I will see the current Supergirl movie, but I am still interested in what it is attempting to do and say, and I am curious if it has any elements that distinguish it from other entries in the superhero genre.
Exactly. That's the main function of film critics. I figure I was in middle school when I first understood that, so it amazes me how many others seems to have trouble with the concept.
Also, I'm pretty sure I've never once seen anyone, whether on this board or elsewhere, make a "Waaah, critics have no value!" post in response to a positive review of a movie they actively want to see. If someone posts a positive review, and says something like "Gee, this movie sounds great and/or fun!," nobody looking forward to the movie in question ever comments, "Well, you should see it yourself before considering anyone else's opinion!" That literally never happens. Funny, that...
There are YouTube critics whose opinions I value, but they earned that trust over time. And then there are certain YouTube critics who I learned are just clickbait-farming rage-baiters and they are not worth my time. And they tend to be easy to spot.
ETA: That said, reviews from critics have almost never factored into my decision to see a movie.
ETA: That said, reviews from critics have almost never factored into my decision to see a movie.
In all honesty, I value the opinions of the people here over YouTube analysis or critical review.
Superman to the rescue! Always protecting his cousin...
I've had a few occasions where positive reviews convinced me to see a movie I otherwise wouldn't have bothered with. (Most recently: Backrooms.). That said, when a film gets a critical drubbing I'm rarely surprised. You can often tell just from the marketing.
Completely reasonable.
Also completely reasonable!
The only thing that's not reasonable is to say "I'm so open-minded, I hereby decree that nobody should ever listen to any critics, ever."
Exactly. I exercise my own judgement by choosing to listen to critics, and not to people who say I shouldn't.
This is a really great point.
Criticism is much more than just rating something or even picking something apart. It should place the piece of art in a larger context, both against other art, and culturally. Good criticism's primary focus is not saying whether a work is good or bad and seeking to defend your point. It's not a high schoolers five paragraph essay.
A good review should give you the broad scope of a work and an overview of its finer points. In the end you don't have to agree with the critics personal view and still have enough understanding of the piece of art to decide if you want to experience it.
You should be able to read/watch a review for a work you never even plan on experiencing like a play, opera, art show or concert and still come away enriched with an understanding of the experience.
That is the role of a critic. If you're not doing that then you're just some asshole with an opinion. And there are too many of them on social media and previous few who approach the job as a professional.
Similar threads
