Alex Holt
Jan-16-2012
For the love of Movies
For the love of movies
was a very intriguing movie because from the start of it, you can’t tell if it
will be a documentary or a short film or some kind of narrative. So it comes
out to be a little bit of all of the above. In this movie it really shows different views
of how movie critics are viewed. I never knew that critics played as much of a roll in
the movie industry as it does, I believe the reason why I never realized that
is because the movie industry doesn’t give critics the energy or light they
should. In this film they also talk about two different styles of criticism
dating way back to the 1920s and these styles are still somewhat used in styles
of writing by critics in recent films.
From watching this movie
it seems that the hardest job of a movie director is to get their message
across to the critics as well as the viewers in a way that pleases everyone.
The critics show no mercy on the directors. The directories seem to value the
film critic’s opinion because in the movie it shows the director giving the
film critics readings some thought. In the movie they talked about high vs.
popular culture. I feel like this was an important because high culture wasn’t
taken serious and pop culture was taking serious and influenced the rest of the
cultures to go with popular culture , this seemed like to me to be the turning
point in the critics viewing and writing style. I also really like the change
in the film when Elvis Mitchell talked about why he became a film critic. I
feel like this part of the movie turned it from a short film to a film with
meaning, I feel like this was the game changer in the movie it showed that film
critics had a point to prove as well as do a job. It also showed that they
weren’t there to just bash the directors as most society thinks. They were
there to show the world that movies still have room for growing , and that’s
the whole objective of film critics is to give the people a higher power of
directing and movies. Another game changer in the movie was when Pauline Kael talked
about her views on women films. She
feels that woman are portrayed show a nonrealistic view of what is going on in
society it is made up on the motion picture, but in reality it is different.
I feel this was a very
interesting film it touched a lot of topics, which I felt needed to be address
for film critics to be taking seriously in the industry. I am glad it got its
message across to me because it would be a shame for a film about critics to
not be interrupted the way it was intended to because this is the struggle the
directors have to face every day they direct.
Some grammar issues, but a nice review. I like that you mention that critics are not supposed to be the bad guys, and sense movies are changing, so are critics.
ReplyDeleteOverall, you highlighted good points surrounding the content of the movie. One minor suggestion, please proofread sentence structure.
ReplyDeleteVery well rounded review.
ReplyDeleteYour discussion of the movie is thorough, but I might suggest expanding each point a little more.
ReplyDeleteRemember that you don't need to say "I feel" because you're writing the review so you can eliminate all the "I feel"s. Good content. I liked that you were specific about the parts that you liked.
ReplyDelete