When talking about new movies, my dad often tread a routine that’s more tired than “Who’s On First?”
Dad: The paper said (insert movie title here) was (insert judgement: good/bad/delicious/etc.)
Me: Who wrote the review?
Dad: I don’t know.
And that’s about the point where I drop out of the conversation. because taking advice from an unknown random critic is very different than finding a critic who matches your sensibility and taste. Your local newspaper reviewer is not infallible.* Critic’s reviews aren’t the enemy, they’re a tool. When I’m thinking of seeing something I usually read Roger Ebert’s review (Even when I don’t agree with him I often understand an respect the points he makes, and his dry sense of humor really clicks with me. I also check out the fanboysite Joblo.com to see what they say about it, and if I feel like being challenged I’ll check out a David Denby or Anthony Lane review (but I often find their reviews to be contrarian for the sake of prolonging their elite status).
I have a friend that watches everything that comes to the theatres, and when talking to him about his latest venture to see something like Epic Movie, I look at him and say “Why waste your free time on that?” This is especially frustrating when he complains about how much he hated something that was obviously rushed through production to make a quick buck. What did he expect? So I guess I side with Dr. Campbell. Life is too short to be watching uninteresting movies, especially when there are so many older gems that remain undiscovered by the majority. A little guidance from someone that has your same taste can be a blessing.
*Speaking of infallible reviewers, I once read somewhere that Pope John Paul II’s favorite film was Strictly Ballroom. Divine!