Sunday, October 17, 2010
Feeder 3.2 - "Scott Pilgrim vs. Film Critics"
After reading the article, it became to my distinction that critics always have something to say about everything.The author, Linda Holmes talks about the pros and cons of film critics. Most critics don't take in the fact that other people may have liked whatever movie it is and they rip it to shreds with their words. With everything, we all have our own distinctions and opinions about what we like and dislike. She writes that film critics believe only teenage gamer boys will have interest in the film, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World and no one over the age of thirty will take interest in it. She is over the age of thirty and she liked the film. Although she likes certain films, she might not pay interest in most films. When she watched Dinner For Schmucks, she didn't like the film, but she stated that the other people in the movie theater were nuts about the movie. No matter how harsh reviews are about movies, we will always have our own opinions about film, or everything else.
In the article, "Scott Pilgrim vs. The Unfortunate Tendency To Review The Audience", it becomes evident that film critics act harshly against movies they don't like. But they don't take in the fact that there are other people who may have liked the movie. When they write a review about a movie, they believe that just like them no one will like the movie and will agree with everything they said. This is the mindset most film critics have and I believe that they don't have second thoughts about anything they say.