Taking a look at the backlash that some film critics have received following the release of Batman v Superman, Eoin Ferry argues for their continued relevance in culture.
Upon its release last month, Warner Bros Pictures’ behemoth blockbuster, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, received extremely mixed reviews from critics, which in turn has ignited a peculiar debate about the importance of the film critic in culture. Since the movie’s release, swathes of fervent fans of the DC Comic ‘universe’, which is home to both the titular superheroes, have attacked film critics on social media for their negative reviews, claiming that Zack Snyder’s film was unfairly targeted by the press, and questioning the relevance of modern film criticism.
The considerable hype that has surrounded the film since its announcement in 2013, coupled with DC Comics fans’ notoriously rabid enthusiasm and passion for the comic book franchise and its movies, has undoubtedly been the source of much of the aggression. This type of furore has precedent, as New York Times head film critic A.O Scott testifies in his new book Better Living Through Criticism. Scott describes the ‘backlash’ he faced back in 2012 when he gave a lukewarm review to the Marvel Studios film Avengers Assemble, where fans campaigned on social media to get him fired, a crusade incited by a bizarre tweet from one of the film’s stars, Samuel L Jackson.
During the current commotion surrounding Batman v. Superman, many of the aggrieved fans have made the argument that critics are inconsequential, pointing to the fact that the film has grossed nearly seven hundred million dollars at the time of writing. Others have claimed that critics are ‘haters’, ‘pretentious snobs’, or simply ‘don’t get’ the movie. A particularly outlandish theory claims that DC rival Marvel have paid critics to slate the film. Perhaps the most obnoxious comments directed towards critics have been remarks claiming that film critics are nothing more than just failed film-makers, who simply exist to vent their frustrations against the industry. All this noise leaves us questioning, just how important are film critics in the modern entertainment industry?
“Far from being ‘haters’, film critics are, first and foremost, fans of cinema, and there are a number of arguments as to why critics are important for film and culture as a whole.”
Far from being ‘haters’, film critics are, first and foremost, fans of cinema, and there are a number of arguments as to why critics are important for film and culture as a whole. Film critics exist, at a basic level, to produce interesting pieces of journalism that a reader may find enjoyable. Film critics give their experienced opinions on films, which may entice or discourage consumers to see a particular offering, and help consumers to discern which films they might enjoy. Diligent film criticism can serve as an antidote to the sterile, phony, ‘everything is awesome’ view of cultural media that some mainstream outlets espouse. At a deeper level, film critics function to educate audiences, improving their abilities to judge the intricacies of a film, which enhances their engagement with, and potentially enjoyment of, the work itself. Film criticism operates to hold creators to a high standard, which is crucial in all forms of art. Moreover, as Scott asserts in his book, criticism can be viewed as ‘art in its own right’, quoting eminent journalist and critic H.L Mencken who said that what motivates a critic “is no more and no less than the simple desire to function freely and beautifully, to give outward and objective form to ideas that bubble inwardly and have a fascinating lure in them, to get rid of them dramatically and make an articulate noise in the world.”
Criticism of art is as old as art itself, and the film industry is no different. Film critics have been working since movies began, with many becoming famous in their own right, from Pauline Kael and Roger Ebert to modern writers like Manohla Dargis and Mark Kermode. In spite of the radical changes the film industry has experienced in the last 20 years, with the advent of movies-on-demand, the increasing prominence of the Hollywood blockbuster, film critics have managed to keep their jobs. However, amidst the ‘content nausea’ caused by the internet boom, with the dizzying range of online media websites, and the amount of internet-users with a blog or even merely a Twitter page, there has never been such sheer volume of public opinion on the entertainment industry. This is evidenced by the Batman v. Superman affair, with film critics finding themselves on the wrong end of a particularly outspoken and candid segment of public opinion.
Despite this trend, it is vital to remember that amidst the deafening roar, there still exists, and will exist, high-quality film criticism in the media, providing fascinating commentary on everything from Hollywood blockbusters to tiny independent art-house pictures, educating readers on the craft of cinema, and ultimately, improving the quality of the films we get to enjoy. In today’s sanitised corporate culture and content-saturated media landscape, good film criticism is certainly not irrelevant. It can be argued that it is needed more than ever.
Advertisements