Movie Critique

How can one learn to be more critical about film and TV? What are some flaws that one should look out for?

Is there a non-white in it? Any gays? Is the lead a woman? Any interracial couples (that aren't white male asian female)? Yes? Then it's DEGENERATE GARBAGE.

>learning about camera work and all the other technical nuances
>learning kino history to see hidden references, inspirations, participation in some art movements etc
>watching shitload of movies yo have a wide reference pool and to achieve a good taste through watching shit
user its like youre not even trying to come up with anything.

There's tons of literature about that that you can read.

Thank you user. That's a start.

What are the best ones?

I think you should read "The Anatomy of Story: 22 Steps to Becoming a Master Storyteller".

I will. Thank you, user!

Criticism isn’t about pointing out flaws, genius. Criticism is just about being analytical without inherent positive or negative bias.

My sister in law studies 'film and media science' but she watches only the most basic of basic stuff. I am talking Harry Potter, Marvel and Star Wars (even though she has no clue who Lando is). She still has after 3 years of the study not really learned anything about film techniques, editing, framing or cinematography.

But she is one of the people who loves diversity.. so ofcourse she loves nu-star wars and fem-busters.

Such a shame, because she is pretty smart otherwise

Watch enough movies and pay attention and you'll know.

The only people you'll ever know that will be impressed by this 'skill' is anonymous, autistic people on the internet. Invest your time into something more worthwhile

When was the last time you read a review that mentioned the movie's technical aspects? No one gives a shit about that.

>studying film in an academic capacity
A waste of time without exception. Everyone knows you start with classical art, not this community college nonsense.

99% of filmmaking is catering to the subconscious. Most audiences are only actively aware of the most obvious cosmetic elements of a film - the lead actors, plot, some dialogue and visual elements. But the camerawork, art design, sound design, lighting, and any related motifs or themes are far more instrumental factors in determining the overall quality of the piece. Interestingly, flaws with these latter factors are often confused for flaws in the former - for example, poor cutting during a conversation will make the dialogue seem awkward or jilted when really there is nothing wrong with it, likewise if a character is subject to poor or inconsistent framing rules they may seem less relatable or likeable which is chalked down to the actor or story.

>flaws
that's not the purpose of critique. There are generally three kinds of critique,

1. colloquial, emotional, entertaining meta humor - no need to read a book for this shit just be funny and charismatic around the topic of a film.

2. academic - using film critique theory yer gunna have to look up yerself. Feminist film theory, for example, is the only legit academic field (besides philosophy) that has the 'feminist' label. I prefer Onieric theory. There are zillions of theories, you need at least the top seven or so under your belt to do this some justice.

3. Retrospectives. These range from 'remember that one show' nostalgic romps to 'this is the influence of 2001 A Space Odyssey through decades of film and real world history.

choose your poison. None of this, however, has anything to do with 'finding flaws'. You're thinking of listicles and gimmicks like cinema sins.

I think it's the academic one that people like op think off cause they want to feel smart when watching movies.

I think you're confusing 'theory' with 'school of thought'. There's a good deal of overlap but schools of thought (in particular the Barthesian kind) are not the be-all and end-all of academic criticism and in my opinion actually distort and obscure the truths classical criticism attempts to uncover.

feeling smart is fine but the disciplines developed in academia from narratological theories are intense and frankly: boring.

entertainment from entertainment is infinitely more appealing.

>Onieric theory
thanks for reminding me of this. i studied film years ago and forgot most of that stuff, all those theories. what do you think of cognitive film theory?

To help remember.

If it's white, it's alright, if it's brown, flush it down.

Just complain about the lighting and everyone will think you are really smart.

Literally anyone can talk about the plot, and only autists will talk about realism.

If it's white probably go to the doctor's cause that's not supposed to happen.

This right here.

These are good

I also recommend studying more about literature and philosophy. Literature is one of the oldest art forms and movies, despite being a visual medium, are still derived a lot from the classics. And studying philosophy will help you think about the themes a film tackles, whether ethical, political, spiritual, metaphysical, or whatever.

As for recommendations for books on film, Bordwell and Thompson's Film Art: An Introduction is a standard textbook which is assigned reading for many film courses and contains pretty much everything about the technology and aesthetics behind cinema. You'll probably find an older edition at any good used book store.

one of the key things you need to understand is the motives of the director
a dishonest filmmaker will produce a less genuine and inferior film

Read some books about it

>a dishonest filmmaker
What does this even mean? Genuinely asking.

This is true. I couldn't imagine having a conversation with my friends about the symbolism of eyes in Blade Runner 2049.

He'll I just watched Ikiru which is a Japanese film from the 50s. None of my friends would be caught dead watching it

It's a meme term that is used to describe movies that someone on Sup Forums doesn't like

of course not.

i'm sorry. These academic theories are beyond simple expressions. Each one of them are valid. It' difficult to express them faithfully in any medium.

>I couldn't imagine having a conversation with my friends about the symbolism of eyes in Blade Runner 2049.
Doesn't seem that out of the ordinary. Me and my friends talked a lot about some of the visuals in that movie and what they meant after we saw it. Not to say that any of us are educated in film, we just all really liked the movie and were genuinely interested by some of the questions it raised.

But what if OP wants to learn about film for his own enjoyment?

Stop being a fucking pleb who looks for plot holes and start looking for how the directing, camera and visuals work.

plot holes are lazy and annoying though

Don't. I'm hyper critical, even if it's something I like I enjoy pointing out flaws for some autistic reason. Everyone hates me now. They say I don't like anything and that they regret watching movies and hanging out with me.

>tumblr level triggered