As someone who's just started a blog, I find this attitude towards the likes of me rather pompous and patronising. According to Variety's theatre critic David Benedict:
Bloggers are dealing in unfettered opinions. True criticism is analysis, and it gives you an understanding of the form. Ideally, a critic doesn't just tell you something didn't work; they tell you why.
For someone whose life is largely spent celebrating creativity and originality, Benedict's sweeping statement is surprising. The vast majority of blogs that I have read on film, music etc are certainly not an outpouring of skewed points of view. On the contrary, many writers use the blog format to carefully analyse their topic, comparing and contrasting with other cultural references and presenting a considered view. They also openly interact with their readers, which results in a broader spectrum of opinions being expressed - and, where necessary, challenged. Thorpe's article refers to two distinct camps - on the one hand, you have the "cultural aristocracy... the learned troupe (of) professional reviewers...", and on the other are "bloggers (who lack) cultural memory". In my experience, these extremes are rare and most bloggers occupy a middle ground where they are indeed attempting to offer an explanation of what works and what doesn't work, based on knowledge of and enthusiasm for their chosen topic. For most, blogging is an unpaid hobby and to sneer at them en masse, just because they are "amateurs", appears snobbish.
The thrust of Thorpe's focus is towards the theatre community (and specifically those who blog about musicals) but the article also includes review excerpts from other arts bloggers which are compared to more highbrow comments from national newspapers. Are these critics feeling threatened? If so, it's a childish reaction. They should be encouraged that Joe Public wants to join in the cultural debate; by reading a wide range of views, we can all become more informed.
I'm always interested in what other film critics and bloggers are saying about movies, especially those I've just seen. After writing a review myself, I'll aim to read around and compare notes. I'm no great fan of the News of the World, but I always read Robbie Collin's reviews as he frequently makes me laugh. He voices strong, forthright opinions in an amusing way and while he's unlikely to ever be seen as another Roger Ebert, he provides perfect tabloid fare. Check out his review of The Blind Side, which I saw last Sunday. He certainly hits the mark when he refers to the Memphis housing projects shown in the film looking like "the World's Cleanest Crack Den". Empire magazine was similarly on the nose when their reviewer Ian Freer described the scenes as feeling "like a Disneyland version of The Wire"
On Monday, I went to see The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo at Hyde Park Picture House. Having read the book by Steig Larsson a couple of months ago, the story was still fresh in my mind and I was relishing the movie. Overall I was impressed with the adaptation although at two-and-a-half hours long, the lack of editing was a problem. Several scenes could have been left on the cutting room floor without damaging the narrative, particularly when the protagonists Lisbeth Salander and Mikael Blomkvist are driving around snowy Swedish backwaters. The Scandinavian scenery was certainly attractive but moving along the complicated plot was a more pressing issue. The novel's controversial rape scene was hard to watch but successfully established Lisbeth's complex character, and it was refreshing to see such an unlikely heroine on the big screen.
Unsurprisingly, a US remake is in the offing with Britain's very own Carey Mulligan up for the Salander role and David Fincher pencilled in to direct. It'll all be relocated to the States of course, but whereas most remakes seem a fairly pointless exercise, having a genius like Fincher at the helm bodes well in this instance. His trademark flourishes and past successes in the thriller genre should ensure he brings something new to proceedings.
My nearest cinema is Cottage Road, which lies two streets away from where I live. The building dates from 1835 but it's been showing films since 1912. It's convenient and rewarding to be so close to two historic picture houses but I'm often slightly disappointed by the programme at Cottage Road when compared to Hyde Park. There's rarely anything shown that doesn't fit into the "family friendly" category.
However, you won't find me criticising their monthly Classics at the Cottage nights. The latest was on Wednesday and the film showing was a new print of The Red Shoes, a British classic from 1948 much loved in particular by Martin Scorsese who helped fund its restoration.
Before the movie began, a healthy turn-out was treated to a selection of vintage cinema ads from the 1970s and 80s for products such as Lyons Maid ice cream, Benson and Hedges cigarettes and Brooke Bond D tea. There was also a classic wartime Stanley Holloway short which urged the audience to contribute to National Savings - "lend to defend the right to be free". Clearly a lot of thought and hard work had gone into acquiring and preparing this nostalgia.
The film itself may have needed touching up but its power has not faded over time. It's a compelling tale of creative and romantic passions in a ballet company, all filmed in glorious Technicolor.
On Thursday, it was time for another new release - Green Zone. With Paul Greengrass and Matt Damon working together again so soon after the excellent Bourne Supremacy and Bourne Ultimatum, what could go wrong? Action-wise, very little. There's excitement and explosions, all filmed in Greengrass' familiar shaky style. The myth of Iraq's WMD threat forms the basis of the plot, which surmises what might have happened if Damon's Special Forces warrant officer (based on a real-life US soldier) had pushed hard for answers when failing to find Saddam's supposed stash of nuclear goodies. Personally, I'd have liked to have seen the role of the media, represented by Amy Ryan's journalist, rounded out more fully. Her character Lawrie Dayne is shown trotting out the government line on the intelligence. Reporters may have ultimately failed to hold those in power to account but there were reasons for this - a fear of appearing anti-American, competitive newspaper editors looking to trump their rivals and 'creative' journalism and headline-writing designed to chime with a nation stirred up for revenge by their political leaders. Greengrass fails to address these pressures, under which men and women like Dayne were working at the time, and consequently the thriller relies too heavily on hindsight for its comment on the media's ineffective check on government.
Let The Right One In finally found its way into my DVD player on Saturday night. As I tweeted after viewing: "Deeply affecting. Love and horror beautifully interwoven. Who needs Twilight?"
Next up for me at the cinema is Kick-Ass on Tuesday, which I'll aim to review before its general release next weekend.
0 comments:
Post a Comment