In my meandering through the World Wide Web I came across this site: http://www.spill.com/ that has four reviews made into anonymous cartoons… and their tag line… “if its crap… we’ll tell you!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOgIleHhJjM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-FEUcHo5uA
Here we need to ask the question is opinion more reliable than the critical essay for of the film critique? These four guys have different standards for films and they tell it like it is. Their ratings range from ‘better than sex’ to ‘full price’, ‘matinee’, ‘rental’ or even ‘some ole bullshit’.
This compared to they typical ‘stars’ is quite different. Here the reviewers are obviously aiming towards a certain demographic as they rate them in colloquial terms. They also have in the ‘some ole bullshit’ a lot of ‘chick flick’, ‘rom-coms’ and action films that bombed at the cinema. Here I get the idea of the audience these guys vlog for are mainly guys. And this is where we need to ask ourselves whether the easily accessible is the best to go by – in this case not really. The reviewers for the SMH would be slightly more impartial and wouldn’t say they would want to “choke the motherf***ing kid [in the ‘Nanny Dairies’] like Homer chokes Bart’. Here is where the question of the reviewing level comes back into play. Some of the reviews on the spill are quite funny and interesting but the level of language and knowledge is obviously not high.
So the question remains – is blogging or vlogging a good thing for movie reviews? Does it drop it down to a slightly less intellectual level or does it make it more accessible and interesting for the everyday crowd?
And to go further with this has the digital age not only taken over the film reviews but of films themselves?
In researching this weeks topic I found a blogged review of the movie G. I. Joe that discussed the fact that the special effects in this film makes it all the more unbelievable… and not in a good way
So watch this space - Next week I will be looking through how digital media is affecting films in the 21st century.
Happy watching…
G I Joe and digital media blog - http://twogeeksandablog.com/starbuck/in-defense-of-gi-joe-the-rise-of-cobra/
Friday, October 9, 2009
A different view…
Earlier this week I stumbled past the blog (that I discussed a few days ago) on the critiquing of films and how the digital age has changed it, among everything else. But I took an interest in this idea of the blogging reviewer and how this has kind of changed the feel of reviewing... I found another blog that slightly looks on a different angle.
Have a look at this blog – here the blog talks about the “Film Critiques in Crisis” panel and what a few people had to say about this idea. One of the things that came up was the “decentralization of the film viewing experience”. I can’t say I completely agree with this as I work at the cinema and lord do I know that people are still seeing movies - I think that going to the movies will remain a fundamental event that won’t be taken over by the ‘digital age’ – well I hope otherwise I am out of a job! However I do agree that the internet has opened doors for people all over the world to download the latest blockbuster before reviews.
Another interesting point made by Matthew Boese, the author, was to do with no longer being dependant on geography so “the conception of an audience has vanished” therefore the blogger becomes a more prominent part of the film to review process. “The film blogger, in contrast to the print critic, writes to oneself rather than to a concrete notion of an audience.”
These film bloggers have changed the basis of the critiques and reviews through the less formal style and also by the fact that they “are not primarily concerned with essay-like criticism”. It becomes purely about opinion, judgements and comparisons to films like ‘Slumdog Millionaire’.
What do you think? Have the bloggers in this new technological age taken reviewing to a new level? And is it for the better?
Happy watching…
Blog reference:
http://www.filmlinc.com/b/?p=218
Want some more? Have a read of this:
http://doandroidsdreamofmovingpictures.blogspot.com/2009/08/theory-of-film-critiquing.html
Heading to a library? Have a read of this:
Raymond J. Haberski, Jr., It's Only A Movie!: Film and Critics in American Culture, University Press of Kentucky, 2001
Have a look at this blog – here the blog talks about the “Film Critiques in Crisis” panel and what a few people had to say about this idea. One of the things that came up was the “decentralization of the film viewing experience”. I can’t say I completely agree with this as I work at the cinema and lord do I know that people are still seeing movies - I think that going to the movies will remain a fundamental event that won’t be taken over by the ‘digital age’ – well I hope otherwise I am out of a job! However I do agree that the internet has opened doors for people all over the world to download the latest blockbuster before reviews.
Another interesting point made by Matthew Boese, the author, was to do with no longer being dependant on geography so “the conception of an audience has vanished” therefore the blogger becomes a more prominent part of the film to review process. “The film blogger, in contrast to the print critic, writes to oneself rather than to a concrete notion of an audience.”
These film bloggers have changed the basis of the critiques and reviews through the less formal style and also by the fact that they “are not primarily concerned with essay-like criticism”. It becomes purely about opinion, judgements and comparisons to films like ‘Slumdog Millionaire’.
What do you think? Have the bloggers in this new technological age taken reviewing to a new level? And is it for the better?
Happy watching…
Blog reference:
http://www.filmlinc.com/b/?p=218
Want some more? Have a read of this:
http://doandroidsdreamofmovingpictures.blogspot.com/2009/08/theory-of-film-critiquing.html
Heading to a library? Have a read of this:
Raymond J. Haberski, Jr., It's Only A Movie!: Film and Critics in American Culture, University Press of Kentucky, 2001
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Movie of the Week
http://
www.piccadillycinemas.com/UP!.jpgUP
Carl Fredricksen spent his entire life dreaming of exploring the globe and experiencing life to its fullest. But at age 78, life seems to have passed him by, until a twist of fate (and a persistent 8-year old Junior Wilderness Explorer named Russell) gives him a new lease on life.
UP takes audiences on a thrilling journey where the unlikely pair encounter wild terrain, unexpected villains and jungle creatures. When seeking adventure next summer – look Up.
What do We Think??
personally **** 4 stars.
very cute!
lets see what some other people have said.
Up
"Pixar's latest hero is a septuagenarian, misanthropic crank. And this film is all about him. It shouldn't work. We shouldn't like him, or want to watch him. But we do. You will. And you'll love it."
Gilles Hardie
www.shm.com.au/
"A triumph of animation and imagination, Up is impossible not to enjoy, with its combination of adventure, true love and humour"
Andrew L. Urban
Urban Cinefile
"Up is one of the best Pixar films, which means it’s something very special."
David Stratton
At the Movies (Australia)
a thing of the past?
Film critiquing – has it become a thing of the past? Have people pushed the accelerator so much so that we no longer have those few people whose judgements we value the most? Are we stuck inside a snowballing cybersphere full of opinion and thoughts that just get lost? Is technology not only taking over the films themselves but the reviews and critiques too? They become lost not only in translation but in cyberspace as well. However is it a bad thing?
Check out this blog - it’s quite a controversial discussion about reviews of the movie District 9. Controversial due to the fact that the comment that precede it are pages and pages or discussions slash arguments from what the blogger said about unbiased and intellectual film critiques.
Heres one of the comments: “A.O. Scott’s review isn’t “at odds” with our review, nor does it cast any doubt on Chris’ ability to be “totally informed and unbiased.” The two reviews are clearly describing the same movie, and the same intentions; if you ran the pieces side by side (without cutting out the heart of their arguments), you’d see that they both address the movie’s metaphorical intentions, as well as its slide into action set-pieces in the third act. It so happens that Scott and Stamm disagree on the *quality* of the movie.”
However what brought me to the site in the first place was the bloggers commenting on the ‘digital age’ and how it affects reviews – “But as we approach the end of a decidedly digital decade I have to ask – is it necessary to hire one person to give their very personal view of someone else’s art? Someone who is paid to deliver the equivalent of the Sermon on the Mount about the latest album from U2 for instance?”
The digital age has taken over and we are in the middle of a muddled mess that is the World Wide Web. Now this may seem a little deep and ironic for a film blog but interesting at the same time! bloggers have taken the pedestal away from the almighty reviewers and set a new bar for small littler bloggers (like this one? J) to have their opinion – similar to a for the people by the people type of thing…
Anyway keep watching movies and keep reading…
Blog Reference:
http://www.pampelmoose.com/2009/08/district-9-and-the-problem-with-movie-reviews-in-a-digital-age
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)