Criticizing the Critic...Has it been done yet?

I remember the first-ever critics that were taken seriously.  I also remember the first questions about the first critics taken seriously...how does one become a critic?

How hard is it to criticize a film?

I have to ask.  Has there ever been a critic of critics?

I am asking for a reason.  My friend and I have gotten together every single Friday for the past 10 years and watched a movie.  That’s alot of movies.  It’s true that we can critique every one, but does that qualify us as critics?  One thing is for sure, movies we like were given the little green splotchy thing by Rotten Tomatoes but loved by the iTunes reviewers on almost every occasion.  That turned out to be the way we judged what we would watch.  If Rotten Tomatoes hated it, but the iTunes universe loved it, we’d watch it and usually liked it.  But enough about me.  Let’s talk about who critiques the critics.

Frankly, there has never been a better time to ask.  The launch of the catastrophic bomb that is “The Fantastic Four” has the critics climbing over each other to lambast the film.  More importantly, their input lowers, or raises, the percentage on “Rotten Tomatoes”.   Yes, this group of anonymous people actually help determine whether some people go to see a movie or not.

Let’s look at this a little closer.

As a movie-goer you typically rely on other people as to whether you should see a film or not, especially if you are on the fence about seeing it.  Those people, however, are people you usually know and whose opinion you respect.  Rotten Tomatoes, however, is a group of people you don’t know.  Tens of thousands of people rely on whether Rotten Tomatoes has given “two thumbs up” or not (yes, an homage to the old Siskel and Ebert days).  Not only that, but the movie industry is swayed by what is said by critics, including those on Rotten Tomatoes.

Think about it, a web site of people who have credentials most couldn’t name, determining whether a movie is seen, or not seen, by people because they have an opinion people read.  It’s amazing how this industry became so influential and how many people rely on that industry.

To put this in perspective, if a stranger on the street comes over to you and says, “The new pizza at the local pizza shop tastes terrible and has rat hair in it.” would you take them at their word?  Probably not, I certainly wouldn’t.  I have no idea who that person is.  They could be the competitor across the street!  But that is what we do with movies.  We take the word of someone who could be a complete dunce, or may have not even seen the movie, as to whether we should see a movie.  It boggles the mind.

But who criticizes the critics?  Who determines whether a critic is even worth listening to?  Is there some governing body that says that one critic should be listened to and another is just a worthless hack?  Further, if a person is worth having an opinion, is there a rating on their writing of the reviews?  In other words, can the typical movie-goers even understand what is being said in the review?  Before you think I’m saying that people are dumb, wait until you read some quotes below, you’ll understand what I mean.

Here’s an example of a critique on the newest Fantastic Four movie:

"The film is all foreplay without an orgasm. . . . Visual effects supervisor Kevin Mack must have still been slaphappy from his work on 'Fight Club.’” 

This was written by Brandon Judell of the Huffington Post.

Here’s his picture:

First, yikes.  This looks like a photo that gets shown on a “60 Minutes” murder mystery where he is the suspect.  As a disclaimer, I don’t believe this is the case, so please don’t write to me telling me this is slander or whatever.  I’m sure he’s a perfectly nice man.  If this is even his picture.  You never know nowadays.

Second, “all foreplay without an orgasm”?  Does one get an orgasm during foreplay?  Wouldn’t it better written as “all sex without an orgasm”?  Either way, I’m not even sure why one would use this in a movie review to begin with.

Third, in this same critique, Brandon is quoted as saying, "Based upon the venerated Marvel comic that debuted in 1961, whether this take is faithful or not I can't say, having spent my formative years reading Hermann Hesse and The Hardy Boys. “  Come on, a person who NEVER picked up a comic book is critiquing whether a movie based on the first family of superheroes is good or not?  Shouldn’t the person offering the critique know something about what they are critiquing?  That’s like me saying the new tool used by astrophysicists is a bad one.  I can barely spell astrophysicist let alone judge anything that has to do with them.

Last, but certainly not least, is the question; who uses the word “slaphappy” anymore?  Is this the way he sets himself apart from the other critics all saying the exact same thing but in different words?  I can’t take anyone serious who uses words like “slaphappy”, “zany”, or “fantabulous”.  Brandon is only guilty of one of these, but it’s more than enough.

Brandon, the not so wise one, gave the movie a little green splotchy thing signifying that the movie did not quite hit the mark.  The incredible thing?  People use this as a reason to go, or not to go, to see the movie.  In my opinion Brandon’s review is worthless based on his lack of comic reading alone.

So we don’t strictly dwell on Brandon, let’s take someone else.   Hmmmm, who should it be?  The winner is Jonathan Romney of the Observer (UK).

Here is a quote from Jonathan about the film, "But this unnecessary reboot is a solemn affair, visually murky and misjudged. After a laborious build-up about plucky young things building a teleportation machine, the revelation of the quartet’s transformations feels incongruously macabre, with the faintest overtones of David Cronenberg.”

“Incongruously macabre”?  “plucky young things”?  “visually murky and misjudged”?  “faintest overtones of David Cronenberg”?  Where does he come up with all of this lingo that he feels is impressive?  Again, is this to put himself above the other critics all struggling to be read by the public?

Let’s start with his picture which was left off the critique.  Wise move, Jonathan.  Now no one can recognize you on the street and throw rotten tomatoes (play on words is purely intentional...sorry)

I have a slight idea, but what does 'incongruously macabre’ mean exactly?  If someone said that what you just watched was ‘incongruously macabre’ would you know exactly what they meant?

How about ‘plucky young thing’?  Add the word “plucky” to the list of words that will keep me from taking anyone seriously.  Frankly, if he called my kids “plucky young things” I would punch him in the face.  It sounds like he has ill intentions and that there are not-so-nice undertones.  I can also tell you that never, in all my years of reading the Fantastic Four, felt that they were ever “plucky young things”.  I know he’s referring to the actors, but still...

Lastly, a film having the “faintest overtones of David Cronenberg” assumes that you know the films of David Cronenberg.  Can you rattle off a list?  If you can, put yourself in the top 10% of moviegoers.  The remaining 90% have no idea what movies they are and after watching hundreds and hundreds of movies I feel I should.  Maybe this is my bad.

Now, before you think I am giving Jonathan the little green splotchy thing, which he did to this movie, let me say that this sentence impressed me:

"For anyone who remembers the strip as drawn by Jack Kirby in its wildly inventive 60s prime, this is beyond depressing.”

At least Jonathan, unlike Brandon, can successfully tie the movie in to the comic book origins.  This gives him some credibility at the very least.

But all of these things make me wonder.  Are the critics writing for the general moviegoing public or are they writing to impress other critics by using words that others haven’t?  More importantly, are you doing yourself a disservice by relying on this group of misfits to guide your movie choices?  People like Brandon and Jonathan are telling you that the movie is trash and neither should be telling anyone anything.

I think I would like to continue to critique the critics, but would like to hear your feedback as to whether you liked it.  I’m as qualified as anyone and, actually, so are you.   In the meantime, judge a movie for yourself.  Check the movie time and buy tickets, but don’t look at any critic reviews.  I’m relatively sure you will be able to give feedback without the words “plucky” or “slaphappy”, and that would be a favor to everyone.