EatSleepLiveFilm.com Filmmakers and critics: The ultimate love/hate relationship?

Filmmakers and critics: The ultimate love/hate relationship?

The subject matter I am commenting on in this article is nothing new. The relationship between critics and filmmakers has been a rollercoaster ride across the age of cinema, with the notion of “starfucking” being evident as far back as the professional relationship between Warren Beatty and Pauline Kael in the 1970s, when they enjoyed a kind of symbiotic admiration, before things turned nasty in the years after.

While these relationships have continued throughout the years, the explosion of social media has led to the ability for filmmakers to establish such relationships in easier and far more public ways. Hot man of the moment Rian Johnson is certainly a key figure in this concept right now, with a smart use of social media and close ties with one particular film site that stretches back a number of years, making him feel both approachable but also encouraging an almost obsessive level of fan-worship.

On the flip-side of this is something which caused quite the hubbub on my Twitter timeline yesterday. Jeff Galasso, @londonfilmfan on Twitter, is a committed movie lover who has seen his writing published on a wide range of sites and is making serious in-roads in his quest to become a respected and respectable film journalist. In the interest of full disclosure, he’s also a guy I’ve met in real-life and while we don’t agree on films all that much, is always up for a debate. In a review for the new Noel Clarke film The Knot, which comes out this Friday, Jeff published a 1/10 review in which he basically told everyone to avoid it. Here’s an excerpt:

“The Knot is 90 minutes of non-stop horrible, derivative “comedy” that is never once funny, even in the slightest. With a bare-bones plot fleshed out with hackneyed material that has been done infinitely better by the films it steals from, The Knot is the must-miss comedy of 2012. Save the date for quite literally anything (a root canal, perhaps) other than this pathetic pretender”.

Scathing would be a kind word. Reacting to this, writer/actor Davie Fairbanks had this, among other things, to say:

“You’re quite clearly a sad jumped up cunt that should climb up his own arse and die rather than give your ill advised opinion to the world”.

That’s quite something, to say the least. I have no agenda against The Knot myself. I admire the industrious work-rate Noel Clarke puts in; this is his third co-writing and starring credit this year alone, and I’m a big fan of his film 4,3,2,1. In the nicest possible way, I don’t really know who Davie Fairbanks is, but it has to be said, with two-star reviews in both Empire and Total Film, Jeff is hardly the only person who has found the film to be lacking. But it is interesting that Mr. Fairbanks has responded to a review not affiliated with a publication, instead aiming for a review written on Jeff’s blog where it’s unlikely to personally offend anyone beyond the writer (as opposed to the editor and so on). It would be interesting to know if Mr. Fairbanks is aware Jeff does actually write for a few sites and that people obviously do respect his opinions. But in either case, this is not the point.

Critics, bloggers, journos, whatever you call us, are there because we like to talk about movies, whether good or bad. Films take huge amounts of effort to be made but all things are not for all people. There are many people who may well enjoy The Knot quite a bit, but the job of someone discussing a film critically is not to offer a definitive opinion. It’s about opening a discourse, expanding on the film in order to further explore what is right or wrong with it. This is where I think the closer nature of filmmaker/critic comment can cause trouble. There is a distance that those writing about film should maintain from the filmmakers so as to not influence opinion, but at the same time, filmmakers should understand that those writing about film, and especially when many do so in their own time, do it because they love the medium, want to protect it and want to see it done right. I had a comment on my Facebook page recently where I linked to a review I wrote and a childhood friend said “what was the point in that, you just said the film was rubbish” or something similar. While I’m sure if only positive reviews were written, filmmakers would be thrilled, but what would that do for the medium?

I’d be very interested to read your opinions on this topic.

Stuart Barr

Londonfilmfan’s review is the only one I could see linked on imdb at the moment, which may explain how it attracted this level of ire from the writer.

To be honest, I think there is a tendency among some online critics to make reviews overly personal in their slant. God knows I’m as guilty of this as anyone but the artist/critic “relationship” has been ever thus. At the risk of flaming, I think this current spat has a touch of storm in a teacup about it. Then again a filmmaker has never called me a cunt on FB.

At least it wasn’t Nick Love.
- http://twitter.com/ianloring Ian Loring
  
  I’d think the Empire and Total Film ones would be fairly easy to see but its a damn fair point.
  
  I don’t think it’s even a spat tbh, he’s shouted himself out and that’s about it, I just thought it was an interesting jumping off point for a wider discussion.
  - http://twitter.com/luke_richardson Luke Richardson
    
    It certainly is an interesting discussion, Ian. The bit that always frustrates me is how filmmakers use the lazy argument that ‘film critics are just failed filmmakers’. As another aspiring journo, I have absolutely no inkling of becoming a filmmaker. I never have. The process of writing is my vice and I hope I can stick with it.
    
    At best, Fairbanks’ tirade of abuse is a mark of passion and commitment to his project. He just shouldn’t take it so personally. Sure, it was a ‘heat of the moment’ post, but the vulgar language used says more about Fairbanks himself rather than his film.
    
    Film production is an intimidatingly huge operation and there’s a plethora of factors way out of the director’s control that could turn a final product unbearable.
    - palavr
      
      A great example of this is when COP OUT came out and it was total crap. Kevin Smith bitch that critics shouldn’t be allowed to view his films. If those same critics had raved about his film, I doubt he would have felt the same way. If Londonfilmfan’s review had been glowing, would Davie Fairbanks have even bothered responding? Doubtful.
      
      I know it’s hard to produce something that you have labored over only to have people shit on it. No one likes that but the sad fact is most people aren’t nearly as creative or brilliant as they think they are.
      
      On the flip side, the internet has almost killed film criticism. Any jackass with too much time and energy can become a film critic. No one goes to school to become a film critic. They get a blog and start pecking a keyboard.
      
      I’m not saying that Londonfilmfan falls into this category but I’ve yet to met a blogger that has a journalism degree. Most are just people that love film and have an opinion. I have a degree in computer animation and I’ve been writing about film and reviewing movies for over a decade. Does that make me a qualified journalist? I got my start just like 99% of people writing about film today, an idiot with a keyboard with too much time and energy and great love of film.
      
      So what’s my point? With the flood of “press” rushing to advanced screenings and spouting their opinions, and make no mistake, for the most part, these are people’s opinions and not a real critique of a film, it’s hard for a filmmaker, artist, writer, musician to get fair treatment as people’s opinion will already be jaded before they even set foot inside the theater, buy the book or listen to the music.
      
      I think Londonfilmfan probably wrote a correct assessment of the film, but if I were a filmmaker and read a random review by some asshole that I don’t know on a blog that I’ve never heard of, I would probably go off on them as well.
  - Stuart Barr
    
    Oh I agree, the filmmaker/critic thing has been on my mind too lately.
    
    I will say I have has some very positive experiences and reactions to stuff I’ve written from film makers. Most recently the Soska sisters who are really using social media positively and engage with fans and critics in a fun and respectful way.
http://www.themoviewaffler.com/ The Movie Waffler

There was a similar debacle here in Ireland earlier this year between the makers of Charlie Casanova and critics. The film is detestable and was rightly savaged by critics ranging from the Irish Times to my own modest blog. The film-makers of course trundled out the old cliches that we just need to get laid and move out of our parents house. It’s the only movie I’ve ever given 0/10 as I literally couldn’t find one positive in the film. The head of production left the following comment on my review:
“eric you wanker you wouldn’t know a good movie if it was stuck up your arse
why dont you just die and do the world some good!!”
These people seem to have a disturbing fascination with inserting objects into critics bottoms. I responded by publishing his cellphone number which hopefully caused him some paranoia.
On the other end of the spectrum, my review of Compliance led to me receiving a lovely email from the lead actor Pat Healy and I’m interviewing him next week. It’s rare to receive a comment of any form on a positive review which can be seriously annoying. My most glowing review of the year went to Martha Marcy May Marlene and the comments box has been gathering dust. Whenever I write a negative or even average review of an otherwise praised film (eg Dredd, TDKR) I get a horde of angry commenters baying for blood.
It’s tough, especially at a time when most new releases are mediocre but all I can say is keep being honest. I do think Galasso crossed a line by criticizing an actress’s looks though.