You'd think it would be hypocritical of me to write a post about critics I hate being a supposed pseudo movie critic myself. But oddly, established critics sway what we all think of movies when they come out and they think they know everything about everything regarding movies. I'll tell you straight out, I don't know everything but when I review a movie, I do it subjectively and will tell you what I liked and disliked.
If I like a movie a lot, I will freakin tell you everything I LOVED about it like a Star Trek fanboy next to the Shat. If I hate or dislike a movie, I will comepletely make fun of it and bash it into smithereens. It's just how I roll, its total extreeminess.
I don't have a favorite movie critic myself but I do check Rotten Tomatoes and MetaCritic to look at the averages to see if a movie I want to see is great, average or utter shit. I use to check out all of Roger Ebert reviews and did watch Siskel and Ebert back in the day, but I began to realize old people had different tastes from young people so their opinions weren't really attuned to mine.
As a DISCLAIMER, let me say I respect some fellow critics. Many have the credentials to back up reviews. Many have been in the industry, others have seen more movies than me and others just are an encyclopedia when it comes to their favorite genres. But their are the ones below that I just fuckin wanna punch in the face. You'll ALL know what I mean.
So here ya go. The 4 types of critics I love to hate.
1.) The Celebri-CRITIC
Yes, these are your Roger Eberts and Harry Knowles. When Ebert chided the video game community about video games not being art, he was so fuckin full of himself. Fuck you Ebert. Your a movie critic and you shouldn't add your 2 cents in about something you know nothing about. But I digress. The celebri-critic is a failed filmmaker or a guy at the right time and at the right place who got his 15 and extended the shit out of it. You see them being the "movie expert" when interviewed.
Ugh. These people get on my nerves as their celebrity-ism seems unjustified due to their lack of cred. It's just a dude's opinion and somehow they've become a representative of a certain age group. Ebert for the neo moviephiles and Knowles for the fan boys. So what we've got is these celebri-critics at times misrepresenting moviegoers thoughts on a particular movie because they are the "voice" of that group.
Plus they're probably just being bribed by the studios anyway.
2.) The Old Guys CRITIC
Lots of newspaper critics get to see their blurbs in their own newspapers. I hate the movie advertisements in newspapers. Because I know some old guy who has been reviewing movies since the 1920s seems to think the movie about a 10 year old who lost his dog is "the best family movie of the year!".
Really sir? Also within this old guys type of critic are the radio reviewers. Really? They still review movies on the radio? Has anybody actually heard of a movie review on the radio? I group the newspaper and radio movie reviewers into the old guys group.
They are dinosaurs and only like movies in black and white. God forbid you don't get why Watchmen was awesome or why Kick Ass was so much fun. When the old guys review horror, they've already attached a negative review.
I'm so glad you guys will be unemployed in a few years. All the dinosaurs will die. Reduced to oil to make my car go "Vrooom!"
3.) The Tour De Force Guy CRITIC
I know, I know. It's to easy to make fun of the tour de force guy. But every time I see read a tour de force review, I wanna smack these people in the face. The main characteristics of this type of critic is they believe they have a MENSA movie IQ. You need to Wikipedia all the references they make in their reviews. They make obscure references to some old flicks 3 people have seen. They reference Fellini and Welles and think Scorsese is a demi-god.
Here is an example from some critic from the Minneapolis Star Tribune about Inception.
Fuck your baroque imagination and your Mad King Ludwig Neuschwanstein Castle.
4.) The Freelance-Blogger CRITIC
Well finally its our turn folks. We too are some of the biggest assholes I've ever seen. I group myself into the critic I love to hate. We're the web nerds who voice their 2 cents about ANY movie we've seen. But sometimes we to don't do a good job of actually reviewing movies.
Lot-o-bloggers just write a 3 sentence review that resembles this:
"Predators was awesome! Lots of blood and gore and the girl in it was hot! Go see it!"
I'd hope we'd write something a little more intelligent than that dribble. Sure I do this as well and take the shortcut review with my WTF Lists. But I do those for shits and giggles. When I try to review a film, I try to make it humorously while doing a little bit of analysis. I have no idea if it works but some think so.
We have to be a little bit better when we review films and you know the interwebs community is more harsher when it comes to feedback. If you really hated a flick everybody loved, say so. The blogger critic is a mixed bag of nuts. It's fandom meets pseudo objectivism. A total pot roast of a reviewer and probably the most important movie critic for the future.
Well that's my critique of critics. Hell if I know if you all agree or want to kick my ass but we all utilize our 1st amendment rights when we log into Blogger or Wordpress. I don't hate all critics and their are quite a few I highly respect with most of them coming from the horror blogosphere.
But I'll continue to be hypocritical when I check on whether or not some movie is "Fresh" or has a high MetaCritic score. I hate these critics, but I just gotta know what the score is.