I'm not that disturbed by this 'weird' news as you call it, and we're ever more distant from the movie critics. I'm sure you know what massive influence critics had in the 50s, 60s, 70s, a critic could make or break a film in the box office. This is not the not the case today.
VFX heavy stupid films do make millions and billions despite what the critics say. The culture industry has been shaped in a way through a feedback loop that the people do not feel the need to seek excellence in film art, they go seeking cheap entertainment and thats what the get.
Also today, with the spread of internet access, everyone who sees a movie turns into a critic of sort and would impose their worldview onto the film no matter what.
If you arrange a voting on hive, I'm pretty sure people will establish why Citizen Kane is super boring and padding 2 is inherently better.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
My thoughts exactly. Times when a critic like Pauline Kael could single-handedly destroy career of someone like David Lean with a negative review are long gone. Whether it's a good or bad thing is anyone's guess. And this "weirdness" with Paddington 2 vs. Citizen Kane is nothing new. I saw it with IMDb rating in 1995 when A Close Shave, 30-minute clay animation film from Wallace and Gromit franchise, apparently became the best film ever made.
Yeah, @drax. It's kinda crazy to think that a movie could be destroyed only with the opinion of a single critic.
Great comment, @fitzcarraldo.
So true!