On Reviews: 2016

I equate the problem with reviews with the problem of Hollywood: they’re so hell bent on selling something that they forget everything that truly matters. To some this may seem like a bold statement. The argument of Hollywood I shall take up elsewhere in an essay on modern film theory but for now I would like to outline my stance on a film review. A good film review should: look at what the artist (be it director, writer, actor etc.) was attempting to achieve and how well they have done it. A film review should also do well to think of the films position to the medium – contributions, challenges, and redefinitions of genre perhaps. A typical film review will forego these things in order to sell the magazine, newspaper, website or worse even the film to whomever it can. In this way the review is useless as it is mere opinion fought violently and will therefore use words like abysmal and fantastic! to argue to this end. Therefore my reviews strive to do the best by these principles taking a deep look into the intentions of the artist and the works ability to work for the medium. I would like to point out therefore that the highest rated films as a consequence can and will not be the highest grossing films. The reason being that these films gross high not because of the film but because of how it is marketed since gross only looks at the small window and not whether it will still be selling 100 years or so after. (Viva Intolerance: Love’s Struggle Throughout the Ages  (d. D.W. Griffith USA 1916).)