If you've read a critic for a while and know all about what they hate about the art form they cover but have no idea what they like about it, they're not a critic and you don't need to read them anymore
-
Show this thread
-
the reverse is obviously true also, which I though went without saying, but hey, this is comics twitter!
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
Boosterism is a much bigger problem, especially as professional opportunities (and salaries) for critics get whittled away while the endlessly iterative franchises produced by giant corporations dominate more and more of the discussion that's left.
3 replies 1 retweet 11 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @theseantcollins
Much, much bigger problem. I mean, we aren't exactly living in a golden age of harsh criticism.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
with TV, i think it's a matter of a lot of writers all liking and disliking the same things for the same reasons. i've got a lot of theories as to why that is.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @theseantcollins
TV criticism could really benefit from a good contrarian (i.e. a Manny Farber contrarian, not an Armond White contrarian).
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
-
Replying to @MichaelMcGough3 @theseantcollins
The weird thing is that Pauline Kael was a contrarian when she started out, but her voice was so strong it became the new mainstream.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @theseantcollins
Even a contrarian critic must have a minimal affection for the genre he or she reviews. (Don't assign John Simon to review sitcoms.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Right. What made Farber & Kael great contrarians is not so much the stuffy movies they dismissed but the under-rated movies they convincingly championed.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.