I get that comment a lot on my movie review posts.
"Yeah, you make some valid points about Gunga Din, but I'd like to see you make a better movie!"
This argument is inherently juvenile. To me, it suggests a complete absence of genuine insight, a desire to argue without anything to actually argue about. You find that a lot on the Internet...angry people who want to pick fights, often about subjects they don't fully comprehend or even care about.
My gut instinct is that people walk around with a lot of suppressed anger and frustration at the world, and don't feel comfortable taking it out on other people in real-world, one-on-one settings. So you get phenomenon like road rage, in which people can act out their wrath on invisible, faceless strangers, and Internet flame wars, in which people can voice their distaste for everyone who isn't them by peppering blogs with bilious, anonymous commentaries.
These are generally just insecure assholes. You can tell by their writing style and taste for crude put-downs. (Any time someone I don't even know who isn't British calls me a "cunt" or some variation thereof, I know I can pretty much discount all of their other opinions.) Still, it's odd that film reviews seem to set off the angry folks much more than, say, political commentaries or personal anecdotes.
I don't want to sound like a whiner. I can take the abuse, really...I'm not so insecure that a few nasty comments on my blog are going to send me into fits of self-doubt and depression. In fact, I kind of wish there was a bit more spirited debate around here, film-related or otherwise. Anyone reading the blog is more than welcome to take issue with one of my points. But is it too much to ask that they actually, well, have a comment to make rather than just a strong desire to ridicule someone else for daring to express an opinion?
Take my review of Lucky Number Slevin. I did not like the film and the ensuing review was harsh. I figure, what's the point of reviewing movies for free on my blog if I'm not being totally honest? The filmmakers themselves don't read this blog, so I'm not in danger of hurting anyone's feelings (and a thick skin should be a requirement for people working in creative fields anyway). Wouldn't you, the readers, prefer to hear what I really think about movies, rather than softened reviews in which I hedge my bets? I'm seriously asking readers of this blog...which would you prefer:
(1) Lucky Number Slevin clearly took a lot of time and effort to produce and much of the production is carried off with an average to above average level of professionalism and ability. I have never personally made a film, and if I did, there is a strong chance that certain aspects of it would be more amateurish and less accomplished than Lucky Number Slevin. Having said that, the movie was not perfectly suited to my tastes, and I found some of its later developments disappointing and wrong-headed.
Or this, from my actual review:
(2) Anyway, this one's pretty much a disaster from beginning to end. One of those movies that obviously just didn't click, but because everyone had already cashed those advance checks, the project just developed its own momentum. Better luck next time, McGuigan. Only, maybe forget about the Hartnett collaborations next time. He's just not up to it.
Now, it's not very nice. I'm kind of being a wiseass, and I certainly wouldn't speak like that to Paul McGuigan in person. (I'd like to ad here that I rather like his breakthrough film, Gangster #1.) But it's how I felt about the movie. Nowhere in the review do I imply that, if you feel differently, you are stupid. I guess I could run a disclaimer above every review, letting you know that it's just my opinion and that I'm not setting these posts forth as an objective arbiter of all cinematic taste. But of course it's my opinion...It's my fucking blog! Who's opinion on film would you expect to read here, Andre Breton's?
Here's an actual two-part comment left at the bottom of that review:
Bro, seriously, what movie's do you like if you didn't like this movie? I know everyone's entitled to their own opinions and all, but you have problems if you didn't like this one. I seriously had to stop reading your blog because of my emotions of hate for you drilling through me. You've done a huge injustice to the people of the world who haven't seen the movie yet and are not going to because of your shitty blog. It's an entertaining movie man! Sit back, grab a drink and enjoy it, dont analyze and critique every word spoken and every step taken. "Strange, yes. Hard to believe, sure." Do you listen to yourself? It's a movie... movies take you away from reality for a while. I suppose you didn't like "Minority Report" because since when do people get around retinal scans by having eye transplants?! Who ever heard of that garbage?! Get your face out of the books man, your broadcasting to the world with this blog that you were the kid in highschool that got his underwear pulled over his head, stuffed in a locker and dunked in a toilet on a regular basis. I hate you.
And another thing cuntbag, nobody cares about your movie opinions, who your favorite directors are and other uninteresting stuff that apparently gets you off. Your blog is boring and I hate the fact that one of your lame posts caused me to look around it just to see how much of a dick you really are. It's no wonder that Roman Polanski rates high on your list of favorite directors, because you both probably have child molestation in common. I know your type, you're either a lame film student that graduated, with no direction whatsoever that gets mad when other people put out good movies, or a college film professor, also, who went nowhere in life and had to turn to a life of blogging his uninteresting movie opinions to people hoping that he can find some followers of his own. If you could do better, do it then, dick.
First off, I hate being called "bro," both in real life and on the Internets. I have only one bro, and he never ever refers to me as such, and I prefer it that way.
I'd like to stress that this comment is atypical only in its length. Most of the comments left here consist one or two sentences. But because this guy (and I'm assuming thsis the work of a male, probably an adolescent one) goes on for a while, we can extrapolate a lot of Universal Mean-Spirited Blog Comment tropes from this one example.
BLATANT CONTRADICTION
Anonymous can't really get through two sentences without contradicting himself. My opinions are not interesting, yet he has clearly read several entries on my blog. (He knows, for example, that Roman Polanski was on my Top 10 Directors list.) It's lame to spout off about movies on the Internet, yet here he is, spouting off about movies on someone else's website without providing even a pseudonym. No one cares what I think, and yet I should be encouraged to make my own films as a response to Lucky Number Slevin!
Blatant contradiction is perhaps the most comment anonymous comment attribute. It happens so often in comments, I tend to think a lot of them are left as pranks by friends of mine. Check out this comment, left a few days ago on my review of Joss Whedon's Firefly.
mommy not give you enough hugs when you were growing up? So much anger and bitterness. It's a movie, get over yourself. I loved firefly, serenity was a let down but at the end of the day I am not bothered about it. I have a life and I love cinema, some of its fantastic Old Boy and million dollar baby, some of its just there serenity, sixth sense (oh the guy's DEAD, didn't see that coming) and some of it is used toilet paper. (fast and furious, starship troopers) BUT somebody somewhere loves it and it speaks to them or they wouldn't be able to sell all those tickets and DVDs now, would they? One mans meat..yada yada
Okay, so put aside the ludicrous idea that my disliking a movie this idiot liked translates to me "not having a life." Can you spot the blatant contradiction?
Giving my opinion about Serenity reflects my anger and bitterness. I don't understand that it's just a movie, and that writing down what I think about said movie makes me a loser who can't get over myself.
Yet two sentences later, this fool starts rattling off his own opinions about movies! (Including the woefully inaccurate assertion that Starship Troopers is akin to "used toilet paper.") That's got to be a parody of a troll, right? That can't be a real comment. No one's that stupid.
BULLYING RHETORIC
This sounds like someone who wishes to silence me. In fact, more than once, he instructs me to be quiet. "Sit back, grab a drink and enjoy it, dont analyze and critique every word spoken and every step taken." "You've done a huge injustice to the people of the world who haven't seen the movie yet and are not going to because of your shitty blog."
ATTEMPT TO CLASIFY ME BASED ON MY OPINIONS
The commentator insists that I must be a frustrated film professor based on my review. I think he means that as a put-down, but I wouldn't really mind a tenured position teaching film at a quality university. You get paid to watch lots of movies and write about them. It's what I do now, pretty much, but with benefits and a nicer apartment. Isn't it complementary to read someone's writing about film and conclude that they must be a Ph.D. in the subject?
So that's actually kind of a nice one, but usually peopel conclude that I must be some kind of basement-dwelling mouthbreather because I have a film-centered blog. I won't lie to you...In many, many ways, I fit the film nerd stereotype to a T.
I work in a video store. I am overweight. I am kind of a slob. I don't go on a ton of dates. Sometimes, late at night, when no one's around, I will watch cartoons in my underwear while drinking Mountain Dew. I can quote entire Monty Python routines and whole scenes from This is Spinal Tap and I know the theme song from "Duck Tales" by heart, still, to this day. I have paid to see Tenacious D and The Kids in the Hall in concert.
But even if a well-placed anonymous zinger confirmed to the entire universe my dork credentials, how does this discount my opinions about a movie, exactly? Being somewhat easily categorized someone makes my observations about the world less salient? It's not that it's mean, necessarily. It's dehumanizing. I have no life, meaning I am worthless, meaning my opinion matters less than those of other people.
I swear, I'm building to a point here. It's not supposed to be a pity thing. What I'm saying is that I think all these angry anonymous comments seem so similar because they all come from the same place. It's oversimplifying to say that individual, unrelated frustrations cause so many people to come here and rant at me without even trying to make an actual point or raise a counterargument.
These people want me to be quiet because any contrary opinion causes them to question their own position, and thus cannot be tolerated. On one level, people just don't like to have their conclusions dismissed, both out of pride and fear of humiliation. If I've told 10 people that Lucky Number Slevin is great, and then I read online some guy ripping it apart, it raises the possibility that others will think it's terrible as well, thus causing them to question my judgement and taste.
But on another level, reading an thorough takedown of a movie he or she enjoyed makes some individuals (generally the weak-minded) feel inherently threatened. I am not questioning Paul McGuigan's filmmaking but the judgement of my readers. And how have Americans been trained to deal with threats? Violence, or if this option is not available, intimidation.
Hence, the contradictory and nonsensical arguments, always delivered with maximum dehumanizing language intended to humiliate and ostracize. These Anonymous Commenters wish to bully me, wish to prove their superiorty over me because I raised doubts about their cognitive abilities.
I'd like to stress that I think all of this works independantly of my reviews. I word my opinions strongly, which obviously triggers a defensive response in some people, but I'm not trying to say that I'm always right and my angry readers always wrong. I mean, lots of people seem to like Lucky Number Slevin. Perhaps you would as well. I think of my reviews as conversations about film, bringing up points of interest, more than I do as some kind of "guide" to what people should watch. Watch what you want.
I think any strongly-phrased reviews that differed from these folks' opinions would be challenged in this way. And of course, I think the phenomenon extends well beyond film reviews or blogging in general.
Conservatives treat politics and social issues this way. A difference in opinion represents a challenge to their very existence and way of life. GAY MARRIAGE RENDERS STRAIGHT MARRIAGE OBSOLETE! In fact, try reading any of those comments in a Bill O'Reilly voice. It works perfectly. "Shut up, sir. Shut up. The fact is, Lucky Number Slevin is one of the best movies of the year. I'll give you the last word."
The super-religious treat faith in this manner. "If you are a nonbeliever, you are AN ABOMINATION!"
In fact, I'd say this kind of eliminiationist gainsaying provides the backbone for much of our public discourse. It's really unfortunate that we can't start out with the notion that it's okay, nay encouraged, to disagree. Everything's more interesting once people stop trying to convince one another and simply attempt to converse.
Notice I didn't say it's okay to lie and distort known information, which is why George W. Bush and other Republican politicians don't get around this loophole. It's not okay to disagree that they are traitorous scumbags. That is no longer a manner of opinion but proven fact. We're talking about subjective issues here. And for the record, my mother has always been affectionate towards me.
Though I loved "Serenity" and almost everything Joss Whedon has ever done, I would read with interest anyone's opinion who didn't, and would never bother to write any of the idiotic comments you have received ... stupidity is taking over the world
ReplyDeleteI've been lurking around here for a little while, and the thing that really sets you apart from most film critics is your ability to clearly articulate why you liked or disliked a film. A lot of art critics fill their movie/concert/food/book/etc. reviews with statements like: "the plot was thin" or "the band was off tonight" or "the sauce lacked depth" but never explain what they mean or why they felt that way. I feel like a lot of critics just describe their visceral reaction to a movie and pretty much leave it at that. You actually investigate what it was about the movie that led to your reaction. I often disagree with your reviews, but I always see exactly where you're coming from.
ReplyDeleteI do like the name Brothers of Famous Bloggers. But there's no sense in being fair to Anonymous. I feel like RF and Hodge both confirm my point - intelligent people can have a discussion about film that doesn't immediately descend into insults and bullying. Anyone who stoops to such rhetorical techniques in response to a blogged film review isn't worth debating.
ReplyDelete(I should stress that I generally think these Anonymous jerks are 12 years old. There's definitely a middle-school vibe to some of their absolutist commentaries.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteWhat the hostile commentaters on your blog don't understand was best expressed by the great H. L. Mencken:
ReplyDelete"Good criticism is prejudice made plausible."
I really like this post, and am glad you wrote it. However, I hope you don't feel like you needed to defend yourself. You don't. I hope you wrote this for your own expression and amusement - which were both done expertly.
ReplyDeleteWhy are these people so emotionally invested in what you write that it sparks such rage? I can only imagine that they are either personally offended (because they know you or are somehow involved in one of the projects you've written a negative review of) or they are jealous. The level and length to which they attempt to take you down is totally suspect.
It seems as though these anonymous haters are all the same person (there are some unmistakeable 'tells' in writing style and syntax). Those rants also sound suspiciously personal to me. Not like someone simply responding to something you wrote, but someone taking offense to something that they may have interpreted as a personal attack. And they are using the thin veil of internet anonymity with which to execute their misplaced anger.
That's just my .02¢. I wouldn't worry about it either way. It IS akin to roadrage, and there's a lot of other places on the internet where these assholes can do their "drive-by rantings".
Also, I think Parody of a Troll would be a great band name too.
Oh, no, Shark, the haters don't bother me. I just write the blog for my own amusement anyway, so it doesn't really offend me if others disagree with my perspective.
ReplyDeleteReally, it's all part of trying to devise a Unified Theory of Bad Movies. Why do people feel so strongly about movies that totally suck? And why does it seem like the suckitude of certain movies is proportional to the slavish devotion of their fan bases? Is there some sort of pattern to this behavior? Maybe I'll write an academic paper one day...
I had this ethics/humanities teacher back in junior college who used to always talk about the inherent qualiy of things. Basically, some things are better quality, empirically, than others. And some people's radars are off. They may LIKE something, let's say a certain song, which is fine, but by some standards (mathematical composition, objectivity, etc.) it is simply not as good of quality. Maybe there is some truth to this, and maybe this carries over into all aspects of life. Garbage in, garbage out. But yes, I realize what an extremely dangerous proposition this is. And I certainly don't mean to suggest superiority (talking about quality, not value judgement). So anybody reading, insert all necessary disclaimers here.
ReplyDeleteOr maybe some people KNOW that the movies they like are akin to junk food, but it's a guilty pleasure. And picking it apart for them is like attacking their identity. Or maybe just the equivalent of showing them the nutrition card of the McDouble Cheeseburger they just swallowed whole.
I'd probably agree with your teacher, but with the understanding that it's all a matter of degrees, not black or white. You could say that objects of art at the extremes are almost entirely good or entirely bad - "Chinatown" is an objectively good film, "Mambo No. 5" is an objectively bad song - but after that, it becomes less clear.
ReplyDeleteStill, the part about some people's radars is 100% ACCURATE. Everyone's ENTITLED to their own opinion, but that doesn't mean it has any actual merit.