Motivations of Professional Movie Critics

I always check out the composite scores of new films on Rotten Tomatoes, and read a few of the abbreviated clips of most of the critics. Even the best films will have three or four scathing negative reviews. I think mostly I do it to get a feel for what the movie is about and to a lesser extent whether the movie is worth seeing. While doing this, I get an overall impression that the critics are falling all over each other trying to compete for the most snazzy and poetic metaphors and clever quips, especially when they want to slam a film.

Today's eye catchers include:

"As much depth as a tortilla." OK, that one was worth a chuckle.

"Filled with shootings, stabbings, choppings, beatings and slicings galore but for all the brutality that it doles out, none of it ultimately proves to be nearly as excruciating as the film as a whole." OK, I had to think about that for a while to even understand it.

Positivity or not, there may be more creative writing in a movie review than in a best selling novel, but for the first time today, I realized it's getting boring. To wax poetic myself, Rotten Tomatoes is becoming a mortuary of metaphors. So there! Take that.

Every time a read a review like that, I'm always reminded of that quote attributed to Dorothy Parker (supposedly about Katharine Hepburn): "She ran the gamut of human emotion from A to B."

Movie critics can be so pompous. Sometimes a movie can be enjoyable without engaging the viewers higher levels of enlightenment.

I use IMDB more than Rotten Tomatoes, and I prefer the User Reviews instead of Critic Reviews. Critics have seen so much that they tend to be overly critical, and, just as you said: "falling all over each other trying to compete for the most snazzy and poetic metaphors and clever quips."

I used to watch Siskel & Ebert years ago, when my my kids growing up to get a feel for the content of a film. Watching a clip and listening to them helped me choose, especially once VCR renting became an option. Ebert's taste was usually not always closer to mine than Siskel's.

But the opinions of people i know well were a factor too. My brother, 16 yrs younger than me, helped me appreciate fairly shallow but often comic and with some moral questions raised 'action' movies. When my boys were about 11 Jason convinced me to let them watch Commando (the one where his daughter is kidnapped).

You have understand i often used conversations about movies and books to discuss topics i wanted to with them but.without it being a lecture. Generally, if they were real excited after watching something they'd initiate the conversation, which helped me understand my kids better-- hearing their opinions. By the time the boys were in early teens they had strong.opinions about what i should allow their 8 yrs younger than them sister to watch.

Nathan said:

Movie critics can be so pompous. Sometimes a movie can be enjoyable without engaging the viewers higher levels of enlightenment.

Click to expand...

I agree, sometimes we just need to laugh at a comedy or enjoy the adrenalin rush of an action one.

These days we can often find more than one trailer for a movie on YouTube. I also watch some YT reviewers, tend to prefer Flick Connections, especially his top picks for ones coming to various streaming outlets. He an be fairly objective about main tone and the pacing of movie even ones not that appealing to him.

MACKTEXAS said:

I use IMDB more than Rotten Tomatoes, and I prefer the User Reviews instead of Critic Reviews. Critics have seen so much that they tend to be overly critical, and, just as you said: "falling all over each other trying to compete for the most snazzy and poetic metaphors and clever quips."

Click to expand...

I always compare user reviews with critics reviews on RT. If there is a wide disparity, it points out the critics don't process films like users do. But that doesn't mean they process at some higher level either.

I don't read movie reviews; I usually just want a general description of what a movie is about to know if I want to see it.

OneEyedDiva said:

They are trying to show off their creative writing skills for sure. I never pay attention to movie critics. I've found I rarely agree with movies they think are so great and have liked several of those they say are not.

Click to expand...

My experience also. I have the same reaction to the Academy Awards, and I never go out of my way to watch those films unless there is something in the story that appeals to me. But the Academy Awards are not about showing how creative the voters are. They probably have more to do with actors and directors skills, and contributions to the craft. Those are important, but don't always mean the movie is worth my time.

MACKTEXAS said:

I use IMDB more than Rotten Tomatoes, and I prefer the User Reviews instead of Critic Reviews. Critics have seen so much that they tend to be overly critical, and, just as you said: "falling all over each other trying to compete for the most snazzy and poetic metaphors and clever quips."

Click to expand...

I use IMBD, too. I usually watch the movie first, then go to the site and read the 10 star reviews if I loved it and want to share my enthusiasm, or the 2 or 3 star reviews if I hated it and want someone to help me explain to myself why I did. I don't bother with the one stars because they're usually of the "my DVD was scratched" sort.

I've written over a hundred book reviews on Amazon because it helps me keep track of what I've read and which writers I really like. I try to be very generous with the new writers, but if it's someone getting literally millions of rave review for a piece of trash (I'm talking about you "Verity") then I don't hold back.

On all those review sites people bend over backward to title their review as some sort of twist or pun made from the book or movie title. It can be painful.

I truly think a lot of critics' reviews are based on factors such as whose after-Academy-Awards parties they were invited to and who snubbed them last year.

Same thing with the reviews of dresses the stars wore. One dress is "fussy, bad color, trite" and then a few pages later, what is essentially the same dress is "innovative, fresh, exciting". Mr. Blackwell was famous for that.

More know it all people. I disagree with them most of the time. Movies are like a form of art, it boils down to personal preference.

I remember when Siskel and Ebert were film critics over in Chicago and on the tv. Some of their most critical views of certain films we're not always accurate. I enjoyed many of the films they hated. But on some of them I had to agree were absolute trash.

But sometimes I would watch their reviews, and they would be insulting each other more than they would be criticizing the movie. It got painful at times to watch them go at each other and so I quit watching them afterwards.

Disgustedman said:

I remember when Siskel and Ebert were film critics over in Chicago and on the tv. Some of their most critical views of certain films we're not always accurate. I enjoyed many of the films they hated. But on some of them I had to agree were absolute trash.

But sometimes I would watch their reviews, and they would be insulting each other more than they would be criticizing the movie. It got painful at times to watch them go at each other and so I quit watching them afterwards.

Click to expand...

I remember when they disagreed. It was as if they weren't even stopping at, "That's my story and I'm sticking to it." They actually looked mad at each other. Siskal would look especially hateful at Ebert. It overpowered any thoughts I had about their comments about the film. I used to wonder how can these guys could even stand to work with each other.

But "TWO THUMBS UP" was a boast that the movie production crew would post on the cover of the VCR jacket whenever Siskal and Ebert agreed.