There’s something very ugly about film journalism nowadays.
Open an issue of Empire or Total Film and it’s likely that whatever you read will be aimed at attracting 17 year old boys.
The words “spoilers” and “stunning” feature heavily. There’s always a star rating. The picture inserts are full of tacky jokes. What happened to elegant film writing?
Between 1935 and 1940, Graham Greene reviewed over 400 films in Spectator and Night and Day. His writing on films was as taught and readable as any of his novels. He reviewed everything from Mark Sandrich’s classic musical, Top Hat , to the Kipling adaptation, Elephant Boy. Greene also wrote a number of screenplays and screen adaptations of his own novels, including The Third Man, Our Man in Havana and the excellent Brighton Rock. He described his trips to the cinema as an escape from the daily pressures of novel writing.
So why can’t film reviews today mirror the writing of the 30s and 40s? Why does everything have to be followed by a star rating and a brief and pointless synopsis?
Of course I’m not suggesting that there is no crediable film journalism. The best film magazine currently on sale in the UK is Sight and Sound. Produced by the BFI, it doesn’t compromise its intellegence or condescend to its readers. Reviews are thorough and balanced. Interviews are rarely sychophantic and the essays are detailed and informative.
If film magazines tried to stop emulating weekly glossies and concentrated on film itself, perhaps we would see a return to the elegant film writing of Graham Greene and Dylis Powell.
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 24, 2008 at 10:16 am
messiernumber
This is very well-written, and nicely laid out. Damn you. That said, I would argue that ‘elegance’ is seen as a minority interest in general these days. It implies a certain restraint, when most media is desperate to grab as much attention as possible. There’s also a lot less ‘elegance’ in films, and a lot more T & A, and journalism does reflect this.
April 29, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Thomas
Is it not all based on the changes in society and the fact that the general public has dumbed down. Literacy skills in the adult population are not particularly fantastic. Is there simply any one to appreciate it in this society of the Sun reader? I would agree with the lady above that such elegance would now be for the minority. Another point I would make is that people consider them selves to live in a fast paced way of life. They don’t have time to be reading an elegant piece of writing; if they wanted that they would read a book. What people want is to know how many stars it has and the basic things that make it good in their eyes, such as special effects, use of the latest CGI, plot twists ect. In my eyes the main decline in elegance is due to a change in the whole selection process of which film to see. People at one time would have relied on paper reviews and the trailers at the cinema. Today people chose to see a film because of major hype. Trailers and advertisements are now every where plastered across the internet, TV, magazines, papers, bill boards and public transport. TV also needs to be considered due to it now being a rival. Why buy a magazine with a review when Jonathon Ross can tell you about it and you get to see clips? At the end of the day I think it is just a combination of the changes in society. And though it saddens me I can’t see this type of journalism making a come back in the near future.
May 14, 2008 at 2:43 pm
gjclayton1
Fully in agreement babbit.
Whilst I believe that there is a place for the simplistic star-rating and synopsis style of review for the less educated (me), that place is not Empire, but the Sun.
You would think the least you can expect from a specialist film magazine is specialist critique. Sadly, you do have to look hard to find this.
Thomas rightly points out that the chances of this changing are slim and getting slimmer. There is a market for detailed, analytical film critique, but big budgets and hype will always win out.
May 14, 2008 at 7:19 pm
purple07prose
I think ‘film journalist’ is an interesting phrase. What are they really? Reviewers? Critics? Is this really journalism or just the extremely well publicised opinions of the privileged few?
Maybe the problem is that because film is such an accessible medium, pretty much anyone can comment on it. That might be where standards are slipping…
However, might it also be fair to say that the standards of the film industry are not what they used to be? If you’ve seen one high speed car chase you’ve seen them all, so on that basis, why not have a simple rating system?
Also, to be fair there aren’t many reviewers like the late, great Graham Greene. And we’re much more blase now about the cinema.
Another issue you didn’t mention is the power film reviewers have. Bad reviews damage films. And without money pouring into the industry, the industry will continue to churn out less than brilliant work.
So yes, lets hope for a revival in ‘film journalism’, in its truest sense, which go to ‘the heart of the matter’. And let that be ‘the end of the affair.’