Kevin Smith slams 'nasty' movie critics over bad reviews
- Thread starter Dei
- Start date
- Status
:clap:
Someones getting it right.
Someones getting it right.
I went to see Mother a few days ago in New York (which was awesome, btw).
The film finishes and one guy behind me sighs and says that he was bored because he had "seen this kind of gestalt before". Listening for a few more seconds, I realized that he was using "gestalt" as a pseudo-intellectual stand-in word for "plot".
I wanted to punch the guy twice. First, for using the word "gestalt" in casual conversation in the first place. Second, because he used it wrong.
I think most celebrity film critics (Rotten Tomatoes' "cream of the crop") are d-bags like this guy who was behind me.
Whatever Kevin Smith's motivations might be as to whether he's just acting out because his feelings are hurt, I would applaud if he really invited 500 random movie fans to a free private screening to critique his next film.
The film finishes and one guy behind me sighs and says that he was bored because he had "seen this kind of gestalt before". Listening for a few more seconds, I realized that he was using "gestalt" as a pseudo-intellectual stand-in word for "plot".
I wanted to punch the guy twice. First, for using the word "gestalt" in casual conversation in the first place. Second, because he used it wrong.
I think most celebrity film critics (Rotten Tomatoes' "cream of the crop") are d-bags like this guy who was behind me.
Whatever Kevin Smith's motivations might be as to whether he's just acting out because his feelings are hurt, I would applaud if he really invited 500 random movie fans to a free private screening to critique his next film.
He's both right and wrong imo. Obviously, most of the movie going public aren't all that (self)educated about cinematography, audiography etc etc. And will base their opinion solely on subjective standards. Which is good if you happen to have the exact same taste as that one guy, but not of much use else. However, some movie critics seem to just slam anything, specific filmmakers or are just plain old douchebags.
In reality I'd take the word of friends over some random critic for the simple reason that I know our tastes and where they differ, so it's easier to estimate if I'd like the movie he/she is talking about.
So I'd say, go for it. It can't really hurt your chances on positive reviews anyway.
In reality I'd take the word of friends over some random critic for the simple reason that I know our tastes and where they differ, so it's easier to estimate if I'd like the movie he/she is talking about.
So I'd say, go for it. It can't really hurt your chances on positive reviews anyway.
Cajungal
Staff member
He sounds a little bitter about something that happens to every kind of creator. Critics are both important and unimportant--important because it's good to have people (professional or not) reminding us that some things are good and some things are crap, technically. You can enjoy something crappy, but it'll still be crap (Here I cite my "Twilight is the Taco Bell of literature" comment.) They're unimportant because people are going to enjoy what they want to enjoy, regardless of what they say. And they should.
It's a fine idea, nothing wrong with giving his fans that opportunity. But he doesn't need to be such a weenie about it.
It's a fine idea, nothing wrong with giving his fans that opportunity. But he doesn't need to be such a weenie about it.
O
Oddbot
The only critic whose opinion I'll ever even take into consideration is Roger Ebert. Even if you don't agree with a review of his, it's always well-written and insightful, and worth one's time to read. And I do find myself agreeing with him more times than not.
Also, Cop Out looked like a terrible movie.
Also, Cop Out looked like a terrible movie.
P
Philosopher B.
Agree with CJ 100%.
That kinda sounds like the argument 'You can't shit on Madagascar, it's for kids'. Even dumb comedies can be made well for what they are.That article said:
Eh, he gets mad every time someone doesn't like one of his movies.
Agreed. Ebert is one critic I will always consider. He understands that not all movies are intended to be judged by the same criteria, and that movies need to entertain regardless of what emotions or ideas they're trying to set up.
Therefore, when he says that Cop Out isn't really funny, I'm going to go with his recommendation, and see District 13: Ultimatum to get my parkour fix.
Lol... even I, having the really tenous grasp I have on the meaning of that word, would never dream of using "gestalt" to talk about the PLOT of a movie. The setting, the internal/genre rules, whatever... But the plot??
Lol... even I, having the really tenous grasp I have on the meaning of that word, would never dream of using "gestalt" to talk about the PLOT of a movie. The setting, the internal/genre rules, whatever... But the plot??[/QUOTE]
If he had been talking about the entire holistic structure of the film, that would have been okay, if still pretentious as hell. But no, he was talking about the plot.
I just wish some one of Smith's talents would quit making so many shitty movies. Then he would not have to worry about what the critics say.
ElJuski
Staff member
I mean, the idea of a critic is that you find one that you align yourself with, and they're your taste test so you DON'T spend the money.
So yeah, if Kevin Smith wanted to make me be the judge, I would for sure do it for him for free. That's a great idea.
However, I won't deny that GOOD film critics have a deep love and understanding of film. And I look to them for that as well.
So yeah, if Kevin Smith wanted to make me be the judge, I would for sure do it for him for free. That's a great idea.
However, I won't deny that GOOD film critics have a deep love and understanding of film. And I look to them for that as well.
Unless he's talking about Games, because then you can just ignore him. According to him, The Games industry will never match the Movie industry in quality -because- of it's interactivity and borrowing of Movie tactics, while ignoring the fact that everything Movies use was borrowed from books. It's really a bad case of of "Complaining about Games you don't play". I'd trust Roger for movies, but that's about it.
Ebert doesn't like Godzilla movies...
Well, he is a movie critic.
C
Chazwozel
I like rotten tomatoes for the very reason that it's regular slobs instead of movie critic snobs. Although, I must say, I often agree with Roger Ebert. The dude has given plenty of "popcorn" flicks good reviews.
---------- Post added at 10:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:38 PM ----------
Yup, and nor do I! They suck ass.
Kevin Smith does get really butthurt pretty easily.
:humph:
O
Oddbot
Unless he's talking about Games, because then you can just ignore him. According to him, The Games industry will never match the Movie industry in quality -because- of it's interactivity and borrowing of Movie tactics, while ignoring the fact that everything Movies use was borrowed from books. It's really a bad case of of "Complaining about Games you don't play". I'd trust Roger for movies, but that's about it.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, he's old, probably never touched a game in his life, I just let it go. Doesn't really bother me. Games are just something that really most people of his generation just don't "get." Plus he's a movie critic, think about it, I'm guessing basically all of his experiences of anything having to do with video games comes from movies based on games rather than games themselves.
You know, Kevin Smith is reminding me more and more of Scott Kurtz. And by that, I mean they both respond really negatively to criticism, even (and especially) when it's justified, and often try and make the case that their critics are wrong. They were both once the hot young, new talent in their field that was going to revolutionize things, but now they're just another part of it. Worse, they're both coasting a bit on their reputation. It's to the point where they're being passed by people they may once have "mentored" and are not handling it very well.
I don't think that's the case, Lee. Lots of directors have had movies slammed - in fact, pretty much every top director has had a movie slammed at one point or another. Most of them don't react like this, calling the whole "system is bullshit" crying. The mature ones say, "Yeah, that one was really disappointing" or "Well, I was trying to go in a different direction and it obviously didn't work." They don't say "Well, your criticisms are invalid because this isn't supposed to be serious, so NYAH!"
Wait a minute, hold on, hold the phone.
A Kevin Smith movie is getting bad reviews?
STOP THE PRESSES!
Seriously, Smith's movies - and I say this as a fan of them - pander to a particular audience. And that audience is mostly made up of stoners who get high and laugh. They're lowbrow writing with a lot dick, fart and geek jokes with some occasionally clever and even heartwarming bits. But they're not, in any way shape or form, good movies. Entertaining? Sure. Smart? Hell no. And the worst part is, I KNOW that Kevin Smith is a pretty good writer. He can create really good stories and characters. But it's like he just doesn't want to get away from the kind of things he already does. He basically panders to that same audience.
To be honest, my favourite work of Kevin Smith's is his Evening With Kevin Smith stuff.
A Kevin Smith movie is getting bad reviews?
STOP THE PRESSES!
Seriously, Smith's movies - and I say this as a fan of them - pander to a particular audience. And that audience is mostly made up of stoners who get high and laugh. They're lowbrow writing with a lot dick, fart and geek jokes with some occasionally clever and even heartwarming bits. But they're not, in any way shape or form, good movies. Entertaining? Sure. Smart? Hell no. And the worst part is, I KNOW that Kevin Smith is a pretty good writer. He can create really good stories and characters. But it's like he just doesn't want to get away from the kind of things he already does. He basically panders to that same audience.
To be honest, my favourite work of Kevin Smith's is his Evening With Kevin Smith stuff.
I like Kevin Smith, and like most smodcasts, but he is WAY off the mark. But that's okay. I'll keep reading intelligent writers/bloggers/reviewers, and y'all can just go nuts reading any random Netflix and Twitter review and we'll both be happy.
J
Joe Johnson
"You know, Kevin Smith is reminding me more and more of Scott Kurtz. "
Man, that's exactly what I was thinking. The problem is that wining about stuff like this usually has the exact opposite effect as intended.
Man, that's exactly what I was thinking. The problem is that wining about stuff like this usually has the exact opposite effect as intended.
ElJuski
Staff member
Usual AV Club Interesting Blog push: http://www.avclub.com/articles/that-kevin-smith-thing,39529/
A
Alex B.
I tend to not read film reviews, because they are nearly always completely useless. Most of the ones I've seen tend to be something like this:
- Snarky pun title
- Mock filmmaker or actors
- Partial summary
- Broad, unsupported statements
- Arbitrary numeric/letter/star grade
What do people get from this? I just don't get it I guess. Watch a trailer, look at who's in it and who's making it, and you can usually get a pretty good sense of whether it's going to be good.
Film analysis which assumes the audience has seen the film I'm all for. But film reviews for people who haven't seen the movie are pointless and too easy to do badly.
- Snarky pun title
- Mock filmmaker or actors
- Partial summary
- Broad, unsupported statements
- Arbitrary numeric/letter/star grade
What do people get from this? I just don't get it I guess. Watch a trailer, look at who's in it and who's making it, and you can usually get a pretty good sense of whether it's going to be good.
Film analysis which assumes the audience has seen the film I'm all for. But film reviews for people who haven't seen the movie are pointless and too easy to do badly.
He did direct it, so that might have something to do with it.
He did direct it, so that might have something to do with it.[/QUOTE]
And the director is normally considered more important to the quality of a movie than the writer is.
- Status