Some Critics are Simply Pompous

Nathan Lee appears to be one of those critics

By: Brad Brevet
Published: Monday, July 23rd 2007 at 2:51 PM

I was told by a journalism professor to avoid using a quote to start off any article because it is simply bad form, so in an effort to avoid said bad form I am telling you that I am avoiding bad form. However, I can't hold out any longer as I must offer up a quote from an article titled "Giving It All Away" by Nathan Lee of The Village Voice, an article he wrote in the NY Times about spoiling movies and the role critics play in the process. "To spoil or not to spoil?" is the question and I am heading straight to the end of his pompous article in an effort to spoil his ego-driven piece:

The critic who says too much isn’t the problem. The problem is that we don’t trust critics to say exactly what we need to know.

So, we need to "trust" critics eh? Is this because critics are the end all be all of artistic opinion? Are you telling me that if I read a review of The Usual Suspects and the critic tells me everything about the film I should trust that he/she has good reason for telling me and will therefore make my viewing pleasure better? Is this because whatever critic is going into a movie themselves did not know what happens and is now deciding the film would have been better, or better understood, had he/she been told?

What an ass! What a pompous ego-driven ass!

Is this because Nathan is paid by The Village Voice to write articles that I should "trust" him? Is it because it is his so-called profession and area of expertise?

One of my biggest problems with these so-called "Cream of the Crop" critics is that they feel they are fulfilling some huge void by adding their opinion to a movie. Look around you, anyone can review a movie and they don't need to use big words or comparisons to the 1942 Best Picture Oscar winner to do it.

Nathan goes on to say that he would never dream of spoiling the end of "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" because he doesn't want to be "instantly killed." That sounds like a good reason. How about the fact that it is a dick move? A move I have seen several people do in random comment sections all over the Internet in an effort to ruin someone else's fun due to the fact that their lives are so pitiful.

Nathan's big argument revolves around some film called The Wayward Cloud, a film I am guessing no one really saw or ever will see since it debuted at Cannes in 2005 and has still not been released. However, as Nathan talks about his review he says, "As I worked though my argument it became clear that all roads led to the spoiling of a crucial scene." I read this as saying, "As I worked I realized that I am such a bad writer that I can't simply come up with a way to tell people my opinion without ruining the film."

The option here Nathan is to spend a little extra time and work your way around it. Perhaps the thesaurus has a few extra ways to describe the coruscating, effulgent and resplendent scenery… that way you can fulfill that word count quota and avoid spoiling the movie.

He uses the excuse that he "felt obligated to deter those unfamiliar with the director’s work and who might never give him another chance if they disliked [the film]" and that he "wanted to say something relevant to those in the know." He says he "took special care to name [the director's] other titles" for those that didn't know his work. These were other titles that Nathan thought were better and people should see instead, especially since they now knew what happened in The Wayward Cloud. For those already familiar with Tsai Ming-liang's work he assumed they had already read about the scene online and felt that it didn't matter if he repeated it.

Of course, since The Wayward Cloud is not a major film it isn't a huge deal, but Nathan also says he wouldn't have a single problem spoiling The Number 23 because his "readership does not include humorless scholars of the Joel Schumacher oeuvre." If that sentence doesn't tell you what kind of jerk we are dealing with then I give up. However, I have to wonder who his audience is when he offers up this fantastic, yet subtle opening sentence to his Transformers review:

Transformers twiddles its big, fat, stupid robotic thumbs for the better part of two hours before jabbing them into your eye socket and finger-fucking your brain in the last 20 minutes.

Does this mean that while the Schumacher fans may shy away from The Village Voice that you actually recruit Michael Bay haters? What a fun group of people. I also have to offer his opening line for his I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry review:

I can't speak to the achievement of I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry within the Adam Sandler oeuvre.

Is there something special about the word "oeuvre" that Mr. Phillips needs to use it two times out of three pieces of his I read? I have never used that word in my life, yet Nathan uses it in an Adam Sandler movie review? I guess I will never understand the audience of The Village Voice, or Nathan for that matter. On we go…

For any critic to purposely spoil a movie for their reading audience is unforgiveable and quite frankly an obvious sign that they can't write. To this argument Nathan offers up:

People outraged by spoilers should avoid all reviews before going to the movies or reading the book they’ve waited so long for, because the fact is all criticism spoils, no matter how scrupulous.

Not so my friend, as a matter of fact our very own Laremy Legel does his best to deviate from revealing any plot points in his reviews in an effort to not spoil anything. As a matter of fact his Number 23 review gave nothing more away than any of the trailers and he pretty much summed it up saying, "The concept is Jim Carrey with OCD. There’s more than that of course, twists and turns and bloody opening credits, but really it’s all about being obsessed with the number 23."

In my reviews I do my best to never reveal anything that cannot be found in the official synopsis online. Last I checked there is yet to be an official synopsis for any movie that ruins the film, but what do I know about research, I actually enjoyed Schumacher's The Lost Boys making me one of the "humorless scholars of the Joel Schumacher oeuvre." What a club we have, Tuesday night is pizza night and I am bringing the Pepsi!

I am not saying that I am the Shakespeare of Internet journalism, but I know better than to come out and tell people the twist of a movie whether I liked it or not.

Links from Other Sites You May Like