The Critical Divide

Ah, the division between common folk and that exulted level of the Hollywood critic – the wasteland separating mere mortals and those who seemingly view cinema through kaleidoscope lenses. The role of the movie critic, both venerated and deprecated, has manifested itself into an issue of great importance for the movie industry – there always exists that hope that warm critical reception will propel fledgling, independent films to the forefront of awards races, injecting art-house cinema into mainstream American culture while garnering respectable box-office receipts. Ah, how the critic in all his wisdom can respect “respectable” films. Riddle me then, why is it then that blockbuster sensations so frequently warrant lackluster reviews?

Indeed, how often it is that the work of a critically praised film fails to muster the approval of the heaving, unbridled movie-going masses – is there something that we fail to grasp, some level of pretension that envelops the movie-going elite that will remain unbeknownst to those of us who just view films for pleasure and not for a living? However, I digress. It is evident to most people that critics view films differently – there exists a certain level of film-making that such persons will condone. Films can’t simply exist for the purpose of entertaining. Although I am torn on the matter – I can, contrary to popular belief, appreciate a good action film while fully understanding that no real revolution in art of film-making is being made – part of me is innately drawn to films that can deeply evoke some feeling, somehow, within me: the degree of realism captured by Cassavettes’ A Woman Under the Influence; the vibrancy and unabashedness of Lee’s Do The Right Thing; that shot-of-adrenaline-ravaging-my-veins quality exuded by Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction.

It is a very delicate matter to approach because it is simply so subjective: movie taste is completely dependent upon an individual’s personal preference, and I in no way will attempt to tell you to heed the advise of critics if it is not in your nature to do so. Likewise, disregarding the words of those who consistently view films and are exposed to a plethora of cinematic options would be unwise if you repeatedly find yourself satisfied by their recommendations. It boils down to a matter of opinion – this “critical divide” is alleviated only if you chose to do so. It is in my power, however, to advise you that the world of the movies is not simply restricted to films with shiny autos and drug-trafficking gangsters, or, conversely, to the esoteric concepts of independent films and the English accents of period pieces.

The celluloid reality encompassed within 35 mm film-strips is far too rich an experience to deprive yourself of: allow yourself to be open to what you may consider an unconventional movie-going experience. Listen to critics, but only to an extent. Watch anything that appeals to you and sample cinema that may be out of your normal comfort-zone. Expose yourself to the comedic fare of Knocked Up, but then temper it with the poetic eloquence of American Beauty. Enjoy the rush of watching an intelligent thriller like The Usual Suspects, and then unwind with the romantic surrealism of Michel Gondry’s Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Lose yourself in the futurist pseudo-utopianism of Minority Report, and then travel back to Nazi-occupied Morocco with the eternal Casablanca. It really doesn’t matter.

I’m aware that I haven’t resolved anything for you, and that’s just fine. Critics will exist regardless of whatever I spew onto this page – it’s just a matter of making peace with what they represent that I’ve come to aide you with. Don’t completely disregard what they have to say, just look with a discerning eye and understand that an unavoidable bias will always exist. Be willing to make concessions within yourself by enabling yourself with an arsenal of good judgement and common sense. Conquer the “critical divide” – go visit your local Blockbuster.