Brains enough to criticize
A comment on The Emperor's New Sacrilege
from Anonymous:Being a communications student myself, it's pleasing to think that there are some people who have brains enough to criticize what they think is wrong in media. Keep it up!
Writerfella here --
"Brains enough to criticize" but not brains enough to realize that 'constructive criticism' never is TOTALLY negative. What is missing in such analyses would be like commentary on the quality of the acting, the writing, the direction, the music, the cinematography, the art direction, and numerous other categories that at least the Academy Awards contain as fields that constitute the content of modern motion pictures. To fasten on any one supposedly objectionable facet of such an artform is to dismiss a painting on account of its framing...
Your comment explains why your criticism isn't constructive. You say something positive about this blog only about 1% of the time. And that's only when I happen to agree with you.
Too bad you don't have the brains to criticize anything other than me. Or to provide the evidence for your claims. Or to answer the questions put to you. Alas, these things seem to be beyond your intellectual capabilities.
In contrast to your constant carping, my reviews are mixed most of the time. Sometimes they're positive. When they're negative, they're still constructive because I make the problem and solution clear. The problem is cultural and historical mistakes; the solution is to eliminate them with better research and writing.
I do comment on a movie's writing when I criticize its portrayal of Indians. I don't comment on its acting, direction, music, cinematography, or art direction because I don't have time to write volumes on everything. And because I'm not particularly qualified to do so.
I'm doing what I'm qualified to do. And what nobody else is doing. Why should I duplicate everyone else's work when I'm doing something unique?
Fortunately, I quote and link to other reviews to fill in the gaps. If you want to learn about a movie's acting, directing, etc., read them. If you know how to surf the Net, which remains in doubt, the reviews are available.
Or write your own reviews, hypocrite. Tell us about the acting and directing if you think these matters are important. Do anything other than bitchin' and moanin' about things you don't like or understand.
To reiterate the words in front of your face, Newspaper Rock is dedicated to exploring the intersection of Native America and pop culture. Therefore, it's stupid to criticize it for not doing something else. I'm doing what I set out to do--no more and no less.
A movie's acting, directing, and so forth aren't Native issues, bright boy. They don't tell us anything about Native America or pop culture except in unusual circumstances. Therefore, they're usually irrelevant to this blog.
So is a movie's box office, which is the only thing you focus on. At least I comment on a movie's writing, which is more than you do. Unless a film is a hit, you have no idea whether it's good or not.
If Wes Studi or Chris Eyre said he was incorporating his cultural values into his work, then his acting or directing would become a relevant issue. And then I'd cover it. Until then, no.
In short, quit wasting our time wishing this blog would be something it isn't. Take a hike if you don't like my goals and objectives. Hit the road, Jack, and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Post a Comment