This week I was left with a dilemma, after reading the weeks reading task I realised it came a time where I had to choose how I were to write my upcoming critiques.

Upon starting this subject I naturally thought I was going to be writing in a slightly negative style, as that is the light in which I have perceived the many films I have gone to see in 2017. I planned on writing witty criticisms of poorly made films (in my eyes) and using strong emotive opinion to mask my (to my standards) elementary cinematic knowledge. The more I started to think about this the more I liked the idea of it.

This was until I read this weeks reading. I was taken aback when reading Jane Baxter’s thoughts on reviewing, I had always suppressed my knowledge that people objectively write watered down reviews depending on their publication. What impressed me most about Jane was her ability to understand her role as a reviewer for a certain publication and have the perspective to write a certain style of review. In her case, a review aimed at males aged 16-30, a bracket that would historically watch pretty insufferable films.

Another critic who I found impressive had a very different approach to criticism compared to Baxter and I felt harboured the same overall thought pattern as me was john Conomos. Conomos explained that he wrote his critiques to “provide the means to make cinema an aesthetic and cultural experience.” I too want to write my critiques in this light as that is how I view cinema and believe everyone should view cinema.

The third critic I gained some remedial inspiration from was Adrian Martin. Martin says that he believes a critic should be “someone who has a large knowledge of films past and present, as well as an intense love for, engagement with, the cinematic medium in all its diverse forms…” I agree with this statement wholeheartedly and purposefully look for this quality when sourcing film reviews myself.

After reading the readings and the different approaches to film criticism I decided to form my style based on the three differing approach I’ve listed above. Essentially I am going to write with a mostly positive outlook (this probably wont be true) expanding on films that fall into a bracket of cinema that I believe that I have a strong knowledge about. Whilst writing my critiques I am going to focus on trying to review the film in a way that puts light on the film as an aesthetic experience and hopefully outline some of its cultural points to the best of my ability.

AG