Benji_Eclipse
Posts: 10
Joined: 2/5/2007
|
Here is one long musing on movie publicity I have written. It is entitled:
"The Role and Purpose of the Film Critic and the Publicity Machine"
I'd be happy to hear other people's opinions and discussions on this piece and it's viewpoints.
Although the promotion and criticism of feature films has been utilised for nearly an entire century, the advent of both the Internet and a more commercial society has meant that both camps have become larger and more noticeable than ever before. Sites such as Apple.com, Youtube.com and the websites of film production companies publish trailers, clips, posters, plot details and other such things, all designed to further the success of film after film after film. Similarly, sites such as RottenTomatoes.com, TotalFilm.com and EmpireOnline.com are devoted almost entirely to film criticism.
Exactly how much influence does the criticism or promotions of films actually have on audiences to go and see the film? Recent films such as Ghost Rider and Wild Hogs have received awful reviews but have performed extremely well, while heavily hyped films like Stormbreaker have not.
Of course, hype and promotion generated by the filmmakers should not really be trusted, as their sole aim is to make money from the film and have a clear motivation to lie in order to draw in their potential audience. With this in mind, it would make more sense to listen to the critics, who don’t appear to have any reason to lie.
Except that often they do, for several reasons. For instance, film companies often pay a substantial amount of money on first class accommodation and luxury for critics who are looking to review their latest releases. In some cases, the need for artificially positive reviews can lead to even fouler play. A film critic called David Manning wrote a series of positive reviews for Paramount films like Hollow Man and A Knight’s Tale. It was later revealed that, not only were the comments made up, so was the critic, invented by Paramount to boost the box office returns of the films.
Many existent film critics, meanwhile, do not share their tastes with the majority of the movie-going public. There is an argument that, since critics are people who are far more knowledgeable and selective about films, their comments will not be relevant to most people, who will want to watch the films for different reasons.
Many reviewers will condemn a film for its background. If they don’t like the director, writer or star, if they don’t like the film-makers motivations for making a film, if they don’t like the genre, if the film had a troubled production or anything else, these things can unnecessarily influence a reviewers opinion on a film, even though they have nothing to do with what is being shown on screen.
Films that are heavily promoted inevitably attract film criticism, sometimes unfairly, something that often cause flops such as Waterworld and Raise the Titanic (although James Cameron’s Titanic, which received many terrible reviews, managed to become the highest grossing film of all time). Often heavy promotion can be damaging to a film, as the hype can often lead to disappointment from both the critics and the audience. This can often be caused by revealing too much of the film, such as plot details, twists, visuals and “money shots”, which inevitably lead the audience into seeing a film that seems familiar and dull. Film companies and critics alike are responsible for revealing too much of their films.
What seems to be impossible is for a member of the public to go to any film without having some preconceptions about what it will be like. The only way this can be avoided, it seems, is to sit in a darkened room, with no access to television, radio or other people, until the film has arrived. It is therefore impossible for audiences to form a completely clear opinion of the film that is wholly their own and not influenced by others.
So is the role of the film critic irresponsible for over-influencing the audience? Certainly it would seem the Hollywood publicity machine is. However, the influence of the critic can often be taken as a positive thing, as it can help audiences to better appreciate the film, to understand it and see more of it than if they had gone to see the film without preconceptions.
And yet, with the advent of the Internet, it is difficult to know which critics to trust. Looking up a new release on the Internet will, more likely than not, result in widely differing opinions. Anyone can now post a review on the Internet, yet even professional ratings on the same film range across the whole spectrum, from awful to classic. This is often most evident on sites such as RottenTomatoes.com, where a selection of critical opinions are gathered together. The purpose of this is to create an average opinion on a film, but an average made from such different reviews can inevitably turn out to be inaccurate.
Often, film companies and filmmakers run the risk of being influenced by critics to the extent that they no longer deliver original work, or work that they are excited about, because they are afraid of their projects being panned by critics. This influence that critics have is often the most damaging to the film industry.
Since film companies know that the word of film critics can often have a damaging effect, they often try to outmanoeuvre them in order to deliver a film to the audience without any interference from critics. For instance, they will tell critics at the last minute that they are not going to screen the film to them before it’s release. They often choose to put the release date back, in order to make last-minute changes to the film in order to make it more “commercial”. Often, this kind of behaviour merely angers critics, who often predict that these are signs that the film will be bad. This can therefore result in negative publicity before the film has even been screened.
In the end, is it better not to listen to either of these groups? Do they create their own idea of what a film is without worrying what others will think of it? Certainly, in my experience, knowing too much about a film before seeing it has a negative effect on my enjoyment. Perhaps it’s better to listen to word of mouth. However, it is possible to find a film reviewer magazine or website that has opinions on films similar to your own. Empire, I believe, is one of these. On the whole, though, you won’t know whether you like a film until you have seen it. Seems obvious, bu there you go.
Thanks,
Benjieclipse
_____________________________
Check out www.youtube.com/benjieclipse to see trailers for my new short film, Golem
|
Printable Version
Film Hype and Criticism - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread