Jump to content

User:Brandon Figaro/Film criticism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Brandon Figaro's Film Criticism draft

[edit]

Lead

[edit]

Film criticism is also labeled as a type of writing that perceives films as possible achievements and wishes to convey their differences, as well as the films being made in a level of quality that is satisfactory or unsatisfactory. [1] Film criticism is also associated with the journalistic type of criticism, which is grounded in the media's effects being developed, and journalistic criticism resides in standard structures such as newspapers.[2] Journal articles pertaining to films served as representatives for the film critics who desired to increase the amount of communication about movies to a high degree that ascended above content that was normally featured in popular publications.[3] The critics who work in the media are normally commissionaires who affect culture, since the judgments and choices of critics have the effect of influencing what audience members perceive about objects that are supplied to them, and critics are also able to influence how the audience members choose to think about objects that are supplied to them.[4] In the current era of history, film criticism is interestingly rich in having digital devices that allow films to be analyzed through visual and auditory methods that involve critical strategies of creativity that allow people to become immersed in film criticism.[5] Film criticism is also associated with the cultural type of criticism, which is also referred to as academic criticism, and academic criticism is able to primarily make interpretations of films from the viewpoint of directors while the interpretations place emphasis on parallels that films have with previous works that were deemed to be of high quality.[6]

History

[edit]

In the decades of the 1930s and the 1940s, the type of criticism pertaining to films had to overcome some difficult challenges.[7] The first difficult challenge involves how film criticism in the 1930s decade didn't have any stable foundations to reside on, and film criticism also involved critics having vocabularies that were limited.[7] During the 1930s, the jobs of critics weren't perceived to be great and critics didn't earn high wages for their work.[7] The next difficult challenge involves the fact that the industry related to film even attempted to use intimidation as a way of making movie critics cease with reviewing films.[7] In the year of 1948, a critic named Eileen Arnot Robertson was forcibly removed from her job as a critic.[7] Despite the fact that she filed a lawsuit against the film industry, the film industry said that Robertson's firing didn't occur out of maliciousness.[7] These difficult challenges led to the existences of movie critics who had respect for films, and those new film critics sought to make film criticism be a respected job.[7]

The film industry also got the chance to see that sound was able to influence how people behaved in movie theaters.[8] When people spoke or made other kinds of sounds, they would be causing disruptions that created difficulties for people to listen to the conversations that were occurring in films.[8] Audience members changed how they behaved in movie theaters, since they would shush people as a way of communicating the messages related to telling other people that they needed to be silent.[8] By keeping themselves in silence, audience members such as film critics were able to make all of their attention be on the movies that they were watching.[8]

Journalistic criticism

[edit]

Film reviews are created with the purposes of making the characters, movie plots, and the directors be known in detailed descriptions to influence audience members into deciding if films need to be viewed or be ignored.[9] Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel were movie critics who were displayed together on a television show, which was Siskel & Ebert At the Movies, and that television show was popular while it experienced syndication in the 1980s decade.[10] In addition to having a television program, Ebert and Siskel also published writings in the columns for newspapers.[11]

Format for film critics to write film criticisms

[edit]

Research says that there are ways in how film critics are able to write criticisms that involve critical discussions containing rationality.[12] When critics are looking for film criticisms that are factual, they must not behave with excessive optimism or be too demanding.[12] Creations and criticisms are activities that humans participate in, and these activities cannot be substituted out for an objective list of morals to be utilized.[12] Humans are restrained by the fact that criticisms cannot communicate messages for forms of artwork, and only the artworks can communicate their messages.[12] The second way in how film critics are able to write criticisms that involve critical discussions containing rationality involves critics analyzing their reasons for not liking specific movies, and critics must discover if they dislike movies for the same criteria that caused them to initially dislike specific movies.[12] That requires utilizing criticism that is analytical and thorough with detail.[12] The third way in how film critics are able to write criticisms that involve critical discussions containing rationality involves critics making blatant statements that are scientific in regards to the workings of films, and how the films are able to affect people.[12] In fact, viewers can watch films to see if they are affected by the movies in the same way that the film critics were affected by them.[12] The fourth way in how film critics are able to write criticisms that involve critical discussions containing rationality involves critics being less arrogant when they want they perceptions of films to be talked about, and critics must be aware of criticisms that have been published.[12] The critics who want to argue must base their arguments in criticisms that have been stated by other critics.[12] The fourth way in how film critics are able to write criticisms that involve critical discussions containing rationality pertains to critics moving away from the idea that artwork such as a film shall have clear meanings.[12] Instead, critics must view artwork such as films to be the results of working hard, many hours of thinking, and ideas being compromised for meanings to not be clear.[12] This research concludes that film critics must repeatedly view films as a way of studying them, if they desire to write thorough reviews on those particular films.[12] Secondly, film critics have the task of making sure that they are highly informed about the film and film critics are also responsible for initiating the discussions about the films.[12] Film critics are also responsible for knowing the creators of the films.[12] Thirdly, film critics must blatantly state their own biases and preferences without associating them with any theories.[12] Fourthly, film critics must appreciate the films that are given positive criticisms and film critics must not be ungrateful towards those films.[12] Finally, a film critic must enjoy the movies that they are criticizing.[12] In this specific regard, a film critic must also want to make their reviews persuade other people watch the movies that the film critic has criticized.[12]

Film critics and audience members

[edit]

In the academic field of films and cinema, several studies involving research have discovered a positive connection between film critics evaluating films and how well the films perform with audience members.[13] Also, studies involving research in the fields of films and cinema have discovered a connection between film critics evaluating films and audience members having interests or no interests in viewing those films.[13] Based in the perspective of an audience member, a review serves as more than an object that is useful for making decisions.[13] Listening to a review from a critic, watching a critic's review, and reading a critic's review are all ways in which the review is useful to an audience member.[13] The critic's review is able to be referenced in conversations where audience members communicate with other individuals, and audience members can communicate messages about the artistic film that was critically examined or connect the criticism to problems that occur in society.[13]

Online film criticism

[edit]

Aggregators

[edit]

Another aggregator is the Movie Review Query Engine, which is a large data storage on the internet that stores interviews, reviews about movies, news, and other kinds of materials that pertain to specific films.[14] These areas of storage are not intended to help people find specific films or movie content that has aired on television, but the storages are able to help people find reliable film criticisms that can be used as readings for students.[14]

Online film critics

[edit]

Blogs are a good example to view in relation to how the internet has grown to where social networks and live chats exist alongside websites such as YouTube where people can post their own content.[15] That is because blogging has created new ways for people to make themselves engage with cinematic movies.[15] People who engage themselves with movies choose to participate in various forms of film criticism by using video or DVD clips from YouTube that are placed alongside parts of other films for the sound effects or images from the other films to be used in criticizing the sounds or images that pertain to the YouTube clips that are being criticized.[15] Film critics are also reviewers who are amateurs on websites such as IMDb.[16] Also, many postings from amateur film critics are on IMDb.[16]

Online film criticism has provided online film critics with challenges related to journalism's purpose changing on the internet.[17] Although, critics must contend with the drawback of too many critics being online to the extent of preventing critics from writing original statements.[17] Critics can write original statements online, but there are websites that will steal their ideas and not give credit to the credit.[17] Another challenge in film criticism pertains to film critics being pressured into writing reviews that are hasty, since users of the internet will give their attention to other topics if film critics don't post movie reviews at quick paces.[17]

User-submitted reviews

[edit]

Research has found that moviegoers are inclined to leave reviews for films that aren't available in movie theaters, and the amount of reviews will decrease as the films earn more money each week.[18] When the amount of money that films earn in movie theaters is increasing, the expected quantity of movie reviews that were posted at prior points in time also increases.[18] This ends up making individuals experience increases in their desires to write movie reviews about films that are earning high quantities of money.[18] When movies are given high ratings, those high ratings are able to persuade viewers of movies to watch other films that share aspects of the movies that viewers prefer to see.[19] The explanations for why movies are given high ratings are able to reach online groups of people who watch movies, and the explanations for movies having high ratings are explained through the usage of reviews that are posted in those online groups.[19]

Academic film criticism

[edit]

The critics that participated in academic film criticism during the years between 2002 and 2006 had written reviews pertaining to the fact that they disapproved of modern films that were in the horror genre.[20] In the year 2002, a critic named Reynold Humphries made his own discussion in The American Horror Film reach its end when he said that the horror genre's films were not good, and Humphries also stated that films in the horror genre weren't enjoyable.[20] A critic named Kendall Phillips wrote a book titled Projected Fears, and ending the book during the year 2006 involved Phillips saying that American horror films had fallen into the cycle of being movies that had predictability.[20]

Academic film criticism is associated with formalism, which involves visual aspects and the rules regarding how they are organized as if they were forms of artwork.[21] Formalism also involves stages of development occurring in an orderly manner, such as learning easy instructions before learning difficult ones.[21] Stages of development in formalism also involved organized stages of development that are orderly, and one example involves people learning simple instructions before they have to follow instructions that involve complexity.[21]

Academic film criticism is also associated with structuralism, which involves controlling a situation in an attempt to make it be coherent, and all the aspects of a situation are assumed to be in a structured order.[22]

Film theory is also part of academic film criticism, since two main film theories have been created.[23] The first main film theory is the part-whole theory.[23] This theory pertains to Eisenstein's philosophy that segments of films are not artistic works on their own, and they are just unemotional aspects of reality.[23] When those segments of films are sequenced in the form of a montage, then the films are artwork.[23] The second film theory is that films are related to reality.[23] Bazin's philosophy involves movies being connected to the real world, which is reality.[23]

Green film criticism

[edit]

Green film criticism is defined as eco-cinecriticism.[24] This pertains to the specific film critics who are interested in environmental types of films.[24] The cinematic counterpart to writings about nature is the creation of documentaries on nature and films that are about wild creatures.[24]

Issues and controversies

[edit]

Influence

[edit]

Film critics are able to be influencers in the circumstances of persuading moviegoers to view or not view in the beginning weeks of movies being available for people to view them.[25] Research has found that negative and positive film reviews are connected to the amounts of money that films earn in box offices over a duration of eight weeks of time, which displays the fact that film critics are influential towards how well films perform in box offices.[25] Film critics are able to influence the choices of people in the public who decide on whether or not they will view a film.[25] Film critics frequently receive invitations to early viewings of movies before the movies are available to all of the moviegoers who aren't film critics, and viewing films at early points in time allows the film critics to write film reviews that are influential to other moviegoers.[25] Film critics have access to information regarding the earliest phases of films, unlike the public, and the earliest phases of films are when film critics are the only reliable sources of information pertaining to the movies that will be in theaters.[25] Research has also displayed the fact that film critics desire to give moviegoers encouragement towards viewing films that are worth viewing while they also display innovation, instead of viewing movies that are simplistic.[26]

Controversies

[edit]

Research says that academic studies pertaining to films had a thorough histiography pertaining to films, which also included different styles of films throughout history.[27] However, the academic studies almost made film criticism reach its end.[27] The academic type of writing pertaining to films had created knowledge, which ended up appearing in areas that had been useful for writing film criticisms in a traditional style.[27] Writing about academic films puts emphasis on generalized statements that can be verified.[27] Writing academic films also involves film critics preferring to view films that are typical, instead of viewing films that are bizarre.[27] That is because of the fact that ordinary kinds of films can be reviewed with generalized statements that can be verified.[27]

Female representation

[edit]

In the year 1929, Iris Barry was a female film critic from Britain.[28] When Barry lived in London, she earned money from being a writer for magazines, a newspaper, and periodical articles.[28] Barry wrote film criticisms that discussed films that were made in Britain, films that were made in America, and Barry only wrote film criticisms on a selective amount of German movies.[28] Barry also wrote film criticisms for French movies that were made as experiments.[28] Barry wrote film criticisms with a critical amount of analysis.[28]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Clayton, Alex; Klevan, Andrew, eds. (2011). The Language and Style of Film Criticism. 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017: Routledge. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-203-81731-5.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  2. ^ Mitchuk, Olha; Haidur, Nataliia (2021). "Features of interaction of factors of social and communication activity" (PDF). Obraz (in Ukrainian). 37 (3): 17–26. doi:10.21272/Obraz.2021.3(37)-17-26. ISSN 2415-8496.
  3. ^ Haberski, Raymond J. (2001). It's only a movie! : films and critics in American culture. Lexington, Ky. ISBN 0-8131-2193-0. OCLC 45230353.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  4. ^ Verboord, Marc; Noord, Sharon van (2016-04-02). "The online place of popular music: Exploring the impact of geography and social media on pop artists' mainstream media attention". Popular Communication. 14 (2): 59–72. doi:10.1080/15405702.2015.1019073. ISSN 1540-5702.
  5. ^ Grant, Catherine (2016-01). "Beyond Tautology? Audio-Visual Film Criticism". Film Criticism. 40 (1). doi:10.3998/fc.13761232.0040.113. ISSN 2471-4364. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  6. ^ Chen, Rui; Chen, Zhiyi; Yang, Yongzhong (2021-03-04). "The Creation and Operation Strategy of Disney's Mulan: Cultural Appropriation and Cultural Discount". Sustainability. 13 (5): 2751. doi:10.3390/su13052751. ISSN 2071-1050.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  7. ^ a b c d e f g Lentz, Tony M. (1973). "Search for Cinema: Film Criticism in the '30s and '40s". Journal of the University Film Association. 25 (4): 69–84. ISSN 0041-9311.
  8. ^ a b c d Butsch, Richard (2001). "American Movie Audiences of the 1930s". International Labor and Working-Class History (59): 106–120. ISSN 0147-5479.
  9. ^ Gibson, Elizabeth. "Research Guides: Film & Media: Reviews & Criticism". guides.library.queensu.ca. Retrieved 2022-10-12.
  10. ^ Baker, Thomas E. (1989). Estreicher, Samuel; Sexton, John (eds.). "Siskel and Ebert at the Supreme Court". Michigan Law Review. 87 (6): 1472–1502. doi:10.2307/1289263. ISSN 0026-2234.
  11. ^ Eylon, Dafna; Allison, Scott T. (2005-12). "The "Frozen in Time" Effect in Evaluations of the Dead". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 31 (12): 1708–1717. doi:10.1177/0146167205277806. ISSN 0146-1672. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  12. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s Jarvie, Ian (1961). "Towards an Objective Film Criticism". Film Quarterly. 14 (3): 19–23. doi:10.2307/1210064. ISSN 0015-1386.
  13. ^ a b c d e Debenedetti, Stéphane (2006). "The Role of Media Critics in the Cultural Industries". International Journal of Arts Management. 8 (3): 30–42. ISSN 1480-8986.
  14. ^ a b Tejeda, Manuel J. (2008). "A Resource Review for Diversity Film Media". Academy of Management Learning & Education. 7 (3): 434–439. ISSN 1537-260X.
  15. ^ a b c Shambu, Girish (2009). "What Is Being Fought For by Today's Cinephilia(s)?". Framework: The Journal of Cinema and Media. 50 (1/2): 218–220. ISSN 0306-7661.
  16. ^ a b Verboord, Marc (2014-09). "The impact of peer-produced criticism on cultural evaluation: A multilevel analysis of discourse employment in online and offline film reviews". New Media & Society. 16 (6): 921–940. doi:10.1177/1461444813495164. ISSN 1461-4448. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  17. ^ a b c d Porton, Richard; Kenigsberg, Ben; Klinger, Gabe; Koresky, Michael; Reardon, Kiva; Tracy, Andrew (2013). "Film Criticism: The Next Generation". Cinéaste. 38 (2): 35–40. ISSN 0009-7004.
  18. ^ a b c DELLAROCAS, CHRYSANTHOS; GAO, GUODONG (GORDON); NARAYAN, RITU (2010). "Are Consumers More Likely to Contribute Online Reviews for Hit or Niche Products?". Journal of Management Information Systems. 27 (2): 127–157. ISSN 0742-1222.
  19. ^ a b Moon, Sangkil; Bergey, Paul K.; Iacobucci, Dawn (2010). "Dynamic Effects among Movie Ratings, Movie Revenues, and Viewer Satisfaction". Journal of Marketing. 74 (1): 108–121. ISSN 0022-2429.
  20. ^ a b c Hantke, Steffen (2007). "Academic Film Criticism, the Rhetoric of Crisis, and the Current State of American Horror Cinema: Thoughts on Canonicity and Academic Anxiety". College Literature. 34 (4): 191–202. ISSN 0093-3139.
  21. ^ a b c Feldman, Edmund Burke (1992). "Formalism and Its Discontents". Studies in Art Education. 33 (2): 122–126. doi:10.2307/1320360. ISSN 0039-3541.
  22. ^ Ames, Sanford Scribner (1973). "Structuralism, Language, and Literature". The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. 32 (1): 89–94. doi:10.2307/428706. ISSN 0021-8529.
  23. ^ a b c d e f Henderson, Brian (1971). "Two Types of Film Theory". Film Quarterly. 24 (3): 33–42. doi:10.2307/1210090. ISSN 0015-1386.
  24. ^ a b c Ivakhiv, Adrian (2008). "Green Film Criticism and Its Futures". Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment. 15 (2): 1–28. ISSN 1076-0962.
  25. ^ a b c d e Basuroy, Suman; Chatterjee, Subimal; Ravid, S. Abraham (2003). "How Critical Are Critical Reviews? The Box Office Effects of Film Critics, Star Power, and Budgets". Journal of Marketing. 67 (4): 103–117. ISSN 0022-2429.
  26. ^ FARBER, STEPHEN (1976). "FILM: The Power of Movie Critics". The American Scholar. 45 (3): 419–423. ISSN 0003-0937.
  27. ^ a b c d e f Nowell-Smith, Geoffrey (2008). "The Rise and Fall of Film Criticism". Film Quarterly. 62 (1): 10–11. doi:10.1525/fq.2008.62.1.10. ISSN 0015-1386.
  28. ^ a b c d e Wasson, Haidee (2006). "The Woman Film Critic: Newspapers, Cinema and Iris Barry". Film History. 18 (2): 154–162. ISSN 0892-2160.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User:Brandon_Figaro/Film_criticism&oldid=1118955755"