Should we care what critics think?
Were you intending to prove my point or refute it (given your artistic educational pedigree)?
- What exactly was your point of responding?
- Were you on the side of the critics?
- Have you even seen the movie?
Is this what you got from my anti-review? Is this where the argument breaks down for you? Given the nature of critics (their status and their ability to make and break movies with their opinions and academic review of movies) I hardly see this as a straw man.
“Academic criticism” in this case, was meant as a pejorative in that critics consider themselves and their understanding of movies and the literature they are often derived from to be superior to the movie-going rabble they write and interpret movies for.
Critics often espouse themselves as above the common men and unfortunately that is how the common men often see them, as enlightened arbiters of taste, gatekeepers to what we should be looking for in defining our culture using movies as the barometer.
“In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little, yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But there are times when a critic truly risks something, and that is in the discovery and defense of the new. The world is often unkind to new talent, new creations. The new needs friends.” — Anton Ego, Ratatouille
It is the occupational hazard of being a critic, to render an opinion on something. Many critics will remind us of their many degrees which ensures their ability to define what is good. In some cases, things they may know nothing about. Their lack of knowledge on a particular subject may affect their ability to understand what they are seeing.
I am not casting forth anything other than a statement which says:
Criticism of this movie based upon arbitrarily determined artistic standards for which this movie does not ascribe to, means it is possible for the critics to render a judgment which could be incorrect to the audience receiving it.
An art critic rendering judgment on an art form they are unfamiliar with may lead to a perspective a particular laymen might understand better than the critic does. It does not invalidate the critics perspective, but it does mean the audience who may trust this critics perspective may not know of the critic’s particular ignorance on the subject. Thus learned critics might appear biased toward the subject in question.
As far as I am concerned, any reviewer who has a limited history of comics, particularly of DC’s comics will almost always say this movie cannot deliver the goods. No matter much of what is needed to understand this movie may have actually BEEN FILMED but then cut due to time constraints. As such, it is too disjointed, it requires too much insider knowledge to be worthy of their time and attention.
In the modern movie parlance if you aren’t spoon-feeding your idiot audience the most rudimentary of plots, a profusion of guns and explosions, simplistic motivations and behaviors, dashed with a bit of toilet humor and ample opportunities for cleavage shots, you may as well not bother making movies. [See: Transformers, 2007]
As far as those critics are concerned, they may need to convince me why THIS happened:
Sharknado got an 82%? “Proudly, shamelessly, and gloriously brainless, Sharknado redefines “so bad its good” for a new generation.”
Man of Steel, Batman v. Superman may not be perfect, but it damn sure eclipses anything the SYFY network has ever put forth, including their crown jewel of Sharknado, II, III, etc.
I will take Snyder’s attempts to capture the brilliance of 75 years of the most incredible collaborative storytelling in the history of the world and putting it into a movie that may be poorly understood but emotionally resonant to the people who are watching it, even if it misses the critics who are sleeping through it. Will everyone like it? Probably not. Does it miss the mark? On more than one occasion. Is it worse than Sharknado? Not on any day, in any universe.
All of my personal perspective aside on Mr. Snyder’s skill as a director, if those critics deemed Sharknado superior to the ambitious efforts of Batman v. Superman, no matter the ultimate outcome of their striving, then those critics, pardon my expression: are free to kiss my shiny black ass.