So, what is the role of the critic?

According to the week 2 reading ‘Film Criticism: The Next Generation’ (Cineaste, 2013), the role of the critique is to describe, interpret and evaluate.

• Describe

In the very first class we had of the studio, we created a brainstorm with what critical reviews should achieve. One of the most important points off the brainstorm was description, as the way the text is described puts it through your eyes to the audience. Ever since this class, I’ve been cautious in thinking about how I describe things such as specific parts in a film, characters and editing techniques etc.

• Interpret and evaluate

This refers to your specific point of view; the way in which you interpret the text. Here also comes opinion, whether you liked it or not, and arguing the reasons WHY to the audience. Why has been such a huge part of this semester. Every time I write a review, I print it out (I’m weirdly obsessed with hard copy) and go through it with a red pen. After every opinion/statement I make, I write a huge ‘WHY’ next to it. Then during editing I can add in the reasoning and thus deliver a stronger argument and overall review to my audience.

 

Film critique Adrian Martin has been a reoccurring person we have looked at this semester. He has very strong views and opinions, and is very passionate about the work he does. In week 2 we watched Critical Failure: Film, and Martin was one of the critiques on the discussion panel. In the video he argues that film reviews these days are smaller, with often just a summary of the plot which merely gives things away rather than incorporating opinionated discussion. He says that film criticism is about backing up what you’re saying, and refining the argument.

In week 3, the reading we studied consisted of various reviews on the 1990 film Edward Scissorhands. One of which belonged to Martin, which had a very distinct style, particularly including the points he mentioned in the Critical Failure: Film video. The points I picked up in his review were:

• The first paragraph refers prior knowledge of the text and causes the audience to think. It also requires extra knowledge of other films and texts as he references many in order to support his argument.
• He really briefly outlines the plot and the main character, only for the purpose of putting his argument in context.
• He discusses the directing style with the numerous twists pointed out —- here is where we see his main argument.

I really enjoyed looking at Adrian Martin and his work, however his style is very out of my comfort zone. He is very much an academic rather than a relatable writer, which is what I am. Even still, I was able to incorporate his advice into my work, for example diving deeper and going past just summarizing the plot.

 

Alex Heller Nicholas has been an influential figure throughout the course, particularly in the last few weeks. Her pointers allowed me to fully engage with the text and my audience – an aspect which I was previously missing. In week 8 we used her 6 tips (taste, gender, audience, scale & detail, history and context) to write a mini review on the short I’m You Dickhead. We only had 30 minutes to complete the review, which was a good exercise to see how I could push myself, and it required me to note take during the film to have material to refer to.

In the week 2 reading, one of the pointers was to ‘articulate thoughts and record them before memory fades’. This really stuck with me, especially during the I’m You Dickhead exercise as it’s so much easier to write a review after having notes on it. Without notes, it’s easy to stare at a blank page for ages as all the information is too much to grasp purely in your head.

 

An important skill I have developed is the tense in which the review is written in. Past and present tense has always been something I struggle with – not because I don’t know the difference, but when I write it doesn’t come naturally. I rarely realize I’ve mixed the two up, usually including both past and present, making the piece inconsistent. However, after week 7’s grammar lesson in class, the consciousness of it finally clicked. Whenever you watch a film, listen to a song or read a book, it’s as if you’re doing it for the first time as it’s never going to change. So, when writing a review, you need to write as if you’re currently watching it. This means present tense is always the answer, as past tense suggests you’ve watched it and it can never be watched again.

Another skill I’ve learnt this semester is how to describe music. In the 2017 film Baby Driver, music is such an important element within it as it essentially drives the whole piece. Baby Driver was the first film I wrote a review on, and I was quick to discuss the music because of it’s huge purpose. However, I just mentioned it without going into it. By going into it I mean describing the sound to the audience, giving them a sound in their head they can imagine while reading it.  During editing I was able to discuss the songs in depth, enough to give the audience the full experience. After this I became so interested in describing things, especially songs. With all this new profound knowledge and skills of describing songs, I thought why not review a whole music album to submit for the final portfolio? So I chose an album that has been one of my personal favourites this year (Meg Mac: Low Blows) and wrote a descriptive review on it.

 

Overall this semester I’ve learnt to trust my judgment and be strong in my opinions, always backing them up with reasoning and/or research.