What are you babbling about? I'm pretty sure I know all those words, but what they mean together in relation to this column I have no clue.softclocks said:
It's Hard Out There for a (Critic)
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
I know that feeling from the other side Bob.
Worked at a theater for three years that used to put on critic screenings and it was pretty much a mess every time. Mostly exacerbated by the fact that we didn't have a projectionist. The company had replaced all the film cameras with digital cameras that ran off of a timer and streamed video from a hard drive, or occasionally (I shit you not) a dvd disk. We only knew how to switch the hard drives and disks, and nothing about adjusting the cameras (cause they fired that guy). Even worse, it was a big theater in a low income area, meaning we didn't sell much concessions to get an overhead that corporate was happy with, meaning that we were constantly running a skeleton crew. At best 7 people were working at a time, at a very busy theater.
The quality of our theater sucked, and I know it sucked, and we were never given the resources to fix any of the issues you brought up. In fact it took customer complaints to corporate to get the place bug sprayed, which they had been telling corporate to do since before I had worked there. The theater system as it is now is a goddamn mess.
Worked at a theater for three years that used to put on critic screenings and it was pretty much a mess every time. Mostly exacerbated by the fact that we didn't have a projectionist. The company had replaced all the film cameras with digital cameras that ran off of a timer and streamed video from a hard drive, or occasionally (I shit you not) a dvd disk. We only knew how to switch the hard drives and disks, and nothing about adjusting the cameras (cause they fired that guy). Even worse, it was a big theater in a low income area, meaning we didn't sell much concessions to get an overhead that corporate was happy with, meaning that we were constantly running a skeleton crew. At best 7 people were working at a time, at a very busy theater.
The quality of our theater sucked, and I know it sucked, and we were never given the resources to fix any of the issues you brought up. In fact it took customer complaints to corporate to get the place bug sprayed, which they had been telling corporate to do since before I had worked there. The theater system as it is now is a goddamn mess.
Nope, one of a critics jobs is to judge a film on all its components. (also how is say the story supposed to be judged if a pivotal scene is subtitled and the subtitles aren't visible). But the other aspects are also often vital. Plenty of films muck up the brightness and/or contrast and you either miss details that were supposed to add to the scene or see ones that were supposed to be mostly concealed (say seeing what made that movement). In a great film they all work together so get one wrong and you noticeably diminish from it.Smilomaniac said:
How are you supposed to judge an artist if you aren't viewing what the artist actually did? There is a reason that they bother with 250Mbit/sDCPs in decent cinemas over 36Mbit/s Blurays (Which again stomp over most streamed and broadcast versions). It would be a lot cheaper not to...
A Professional reviewer can only judge whats in front of them, an important part of that is that they are shown whats actually intended. An analogy from film post production, every time you apply an effect you will lose some information (a bit like generational copies) the human mind is similar each time you compensate for a flaw you lose something.
Writing articles to kick up a fuss is doing something. The point of this isn't to whine, he's not even just trying to improve his experiences but ours, unless you think an out of focus picture that isn't all on the projection screen, is in any way acceptable for an experience which is supposed to be the pinnacle of viewing quality. We absolutely have a stake in this, even if it was only the press screenings he worried about, as if the others opinions are based of these poor screenings we aren't getting their best either.Smilomaniac said:
A critic who has the viewpoint of a critic?? Whoa, weird, what is this strange new world!Smilomaniac said:
Seriously I can't believe you're arguing for excusing poor quality. If I pay the already exorbitant fee to see a movie, I'd think I should get to see a good version of it, not whatever they decided to throw out. Movies aren't that important to me, but the point is that they should be that important to them. It's kind of their business.
Wow. I had no idea. I get annoyed when I find a video online that claims 1080p resolution but is actually only 720. I don't thin I could handle some of those screenings you described.
I wonder why they sometimes show critics poor quality versions of the movie, is it that they would rather the critics focus on the poor quality and hope they don't notice how bad a movie it is?
In Denmark it's exactly like going to the cinema (Probably thanks to Nordisk Film, the distributor), only early in the morning with a free cup of coffee and without any annoying commercials. My only "complaint" is that i've heard that they also get a free bagel in Copenhagen, something i haven't seen in my town... It sounds like a better deal than what is being described here, and these screenings aren't even being seen by many, there are usually between 3-7 (Unpaid) critics and maybe 1-2 employees of the cinema at the screening.
I don't know why people always complain that critics are negative though, last time i checked most beloved movies often get pretty good scores on Rottentomatoes.
I don't know why people always complain that critics are negative though, last time i checked most beloved movies often get pretty good scores on Rottentomatoes.
I'd guess it's resentment and irritation actually. Critics of all stripes tend to be viewed as a bunch of elitist, hipster, bottom feeders. Exceptions exist, but they are by and large seen as a necessary part of doing business, but one nobody much wants to deal with. Studios and creators would much rather let their PR machine do the work for them. The problem isn't helped by the fact that nowadays all you need to be a critic is to build up a following through social media, it's not quite what it was where critics tend to be in any way qualified, and are otherwise sponsored by a media source like a newspaper or television network to begin with. What's more they can come and go as popularity waffles, and kissing the butt of some dude right now is not only offensive in the short term, but quite probably meaningless when the same guy might not even be relevant in a couple of weeks. To a lot of media producers these guys are vultures who are finagling a way to see your product for free, and make a living talking about it, and that they can potentially cost you money just adds fuel to the fire. The response tends to be to make these people generally uncomfortable, and rely on the fact that they do it to everyone to even it out. The producers have an advantage in that without events to attend and material to criticize your critic is out of business, and on an individual level it's easy to ostracize a few of them and then just have the rest of them pick up the slack, and none of them want to be the critic who gets shunned so they generally play along. Now the exceptions tend to be well heeled critics who are as objectively qualified as possible to be an expert on the subject, oftentimes people those being criticized have some respect for to begin with. Some fat guy who eats a lot, or some dude who watches a lot of movies and has an amusing style of ranting about them online are people your average person in the business could give a crap about when it comes to their resteraunt or movie, and might entertain as a necessary evil. On the other hand get some guy who is a world class chef who has run successful establishments, and suddenly a guy running a resteraunt cares, ditto if say the film critic has experience in the industry or say is an expert who teaches directors and such at school. There are other things that apply of course, but when you look at the qualifications of some of the big time critics (which many tend to lead with) you'll find they are people who have been around the industry they criticize and oftentimes done the jobs they talk about first hand even if they weren't very successful or well known in that capacity. There are some people just like as well of course, but the point is these tend to be the rare exceptions that get the red carpet treatment. Of course there aren't very many of them.008Zulu said:
The point is that as I said, I think critics are looked down on, and the threat posed by any one of them individually is minor as long as they treat them all more or less the same.
It doesn't help that even in making statements about not being all that, Bob points out "well, people like me were never suited to doing normal work" and even in pointing that out he's referring to a white collar cubicle job. As a former blue collar worker (Casino Security) I find that attitude kind of offensive, and as I've said before in other contexts I really think working a few years doing serious security work, or grunt labor, would do people like Bob
some good. Given that this attitude goes along with being a critic which feeds into the whole "elitist hipster" thing it feeds a lot of the resentment. Bob is a lightweight as well compared to some of the attitudes I've seen coming from critics over the years.
That said he's sort of right about the treatment, while I haven't dealt with movie critics for the most part, the casino where I worked did host a lot of events, including modeling shows and the like, and people coming in as critics "for the media" tended to receive a mixed bag of treatment. For the most part my dealings with them came down
to them demanding access and telling them 'no' however.
Oh and just for the lulz, I will point I have indeed "done a turn on the catwalk" albeit goofing off when there was pretty much nobody around between shows and such.
Wow, the only thing like that that's happened to me is they forgot to play Avatar in 3D for the first, 5-10 minutes.
It was even funnier because I was seemingly the only one who noticed, as evidenced by the "oooh" that resulted from the crowd when my complaint to management was serviced.
It was even funnier because I was seemingly the only one who noticed, as evidenced by the "oooh" that resulted from the crowd when my complaint to management was serviced.
I'm like a drunk reviewing booze. I base my opinions around what I have seen and liked. For games than means whatever the score is by fans or critics I halve because medicorely average is a 5 or 2 in my book. Personal bias will add a point or 2 and rarely dose it hit 8+ or 4+. With films I go with the flow till I am rammed into things. Like some of the stuff in Nolan's Batman, most of the things in MOS,Robocop014, Xmen, Spider man ,ect.
edit
Critics have it much worse as they need to try and balance form and function with whats average, because they see so much they can see more nuances and thus the lower common denominator stuff tends to be bad.
PS
Love ya Bob keep up the good work. ^^
edit
Critics have it much worse as they need to try and balance form and function with whats average, because they see so much they can see more nuances and thus the lower common denominator stuff tends to be bad.
PS
Love ya Bob keep up the good work. ^^
I commend Bob on this pretty solid piece. It made me appreciate the critic's perspective; and it kept me engaged all through-out the monologue. Except for the punchline. The argument of "get to watch the best version possible of the movie" is valid and the whole point in understanding the critic's frame. But it was used too much all over the piece and when it came back, reduced to "get to watch the movie", it fell flat. No real impact there. A crunch-less sog. Everything that mattered had already been said, and the final thought didn't really add any more relevant information nor it was entertaining enough. Should have closed with a solid joke. 9/10 ;P -written from my pager in Morse code.