‘SATC’ commenters: Maybe not as dumb as they seem
My review of “Sex and the City” is among those that come up when you Google the film’s title and click the “reviews” link, so it’s been read by a lot of people who had not been to my website before. Some of these visitors have posted comments along these lines:
why bother to write a nasty review if you never truly watched the show or have decided to hate the movie from the get go?
If you don’t like this type of story- don’t go see it.
I don’t think you should have seen the movie if you never watched the show.
I wonder why you went to see it so quickly if you were not a fan.
Yes it is your job as a movie critic, but why would you even bother writing up a movie review for a movie you know you wouldnt be intersted in and wouldnt understand, it just makes it confusing for the fans who want to see it.
Many regular visitors smile at these comments from people who don’t seem to understand that I’m a film critic, and that film critics see pretty much ALL the movies. And granted, the last comment I cited is a little stupid, as the commenter doesn’t grasp the part of the definition of “job” that includes “getting paid,” which would answer her question of why I wrote the review. (I’m also not sure how a negative review is “confusing” to fans, especially if those fans have already decided they want to see the movie.)
But maybe these comments aren’t so dumb after all. It’s not like the banner at the top of the page says “Eric D. Snider: Professional Film Critic.” (Maybe it should.) To an impartial observer stumbling across the site, it could just be some guy’s blog where he talks about movies. In that case, it’s perfectly reasonable to wonder why he went to see the movie when he didn’t have any interest in it.
And then it hits me: The days of “movie critics” being an entirely separate and distinct group from “regular joes talkin’ about movies” are quickly waning. The Internet has made it so that anyone with a computer can declare himself a “movie critic” — and the fact is, a lot of these self-declared critics are every bit as good as the ones who write for newspapers and magazines. A lot of them are embarrassingly amateurish and detrimental to film criticism as a whole, too. But they’re still part of the group.
To a lot of Internet users, especially people who have come of age within the last decade or so, there might not be any distinction between a Professional Film Critic and a blogger. (Adding to the blurriness: Most Professional Film Critics have blogs, too, and everyone posts their reviews online somewhere.) There’s nothing about my site — or Roger Ebert’s site, or Cinematical, or Film.com, or /Film, or Ain’t It Cool News, or most of the other movie sites — to indicate whether the writers are being paid for their work or whether they just do it for fun. If you had never heard of Roger Ebert, you could look at his site and assume it was just some dude who had written some reviews. The Internet is brimming with sites where that’s exactly the case — the majority, in fact.
So it’s easy to see how a few fangirls could show up at EricDSnider.com and not get that I do this for a living. Now, why a negative review of a movie they liked is so upsetting to them is another question, but that’s more of an eternal mystery and beyond the scope of this blog.
June 5th, 2008 at 5:28 am
I’ve always had to wonder why fans have to take comments so personally. That includes fans of anything really. This movie, sucky video games and bands like Nickleback. I guess people don’t really see the unique differences that drive it.
I don’t even think it’s the fact they don’t know you are an actual, factual critic. Because then wouldn’t the comments instead just be along the lines of the typical angry letter, ala: “You hate something I like…you therefore suck at being a Critic”.
Seriously, why can’t people just get over it? It’s called Diversity…
June 5th, 2008 at 5:55 am
You need a slogan under your name at the top of the page. “Eric D. Snider: I get paid to do this!” ‘This’ of course being left ambiguous.
June 5th, 2008 at 6:36 am
Eric, what I found very interesting about your comments is that even though I’ve been reading your stuff for a long time, I was not entirely clear as to whether or not writing movie reviews is now your full time job or even if you get paid for any of the reviews that don’t end up on Film.com. I’m still not clear, as it turns out.
What’s even better is that at some level I DO NOT CARE. I mean, I certainly hope you’re getting paid good money for something you clearly enjoy and are good at, but from a purely selfish perspective all that matters to me is that I like your reviews and can (searching in vain for a better word) “trust” them because I seem to have similar tastes in movies.
When I read your paragraph about “Professional Film Critics” versus “Bloggers” I wondered: in which one of those groups would you say you are? My guess is you’d say both–but (unless I’m mistaken) your movie reviews have been a hobby with rewards that over time have now become at least partly financial.
I guess it’s all relative. From your vantage point, what you do is different from the bajilion run-of-the-mill bloggers who go see a movie and then write about it. From Roger Ebert’s perspective, you may be just another one of those thousands of chubs and suckers in the movie review reservoir who are crowding out the trophy trout.
News flash to the so-called professional film critics who would see you as a blogger wannabe: Roger et al, I don’t really care whether *you* liked the movie–I just want to know if *I’m* going to like the movie and so I read Eric Snider instead of you. Neener, Neener.
Eric, you are a classic example of what I love about the Internet. It’s the last bastion of equal opportunity (um, and by that I mean equal to everyone with an Internet connection, a knack for writing, and a perfunctory knowledge of how to import Google Ads into their web pages).
June 5th, 2008 at 8:59 am
No, I want “Eric D. Snider: Film Critic Writer Yes!”
June 5th, 2008 at 9:02 am
It seems that you (Eric) have fallen victim to the internet. Before the widespread use of the internet for multi purposes movie critics and any person whose profession is to critique or give an educated evaluation based on opinion or education or both were held in another class. This forced people to purchase or seek more difficult means in which to read your publications, now thet can get on the internet and read it and they don’t know that you are a professional. When it comes to those who don’t like your opinion, embrace that because at least they are visiting the site and you are getting people there, and they will be back, probably just to hear the negative things you may say about their next movie, and as expected they will write a negative comment to you and think that they have made a difference. Lastly, if I have learned one thing it is that difference of opinion creates debate and produces results.
June 5th, 2008 at 9:26 am
Perhaps you should remind them (those who left comment on your SATC review) of what you really think of Titanic. Looks like it’s the same crowd, just with HBO subscriptions.
June 5th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Steve: Good point about the ambiguity of it all. I do get paid for the Film.com and Cinematical reviews, of course. No one pays me for the ones that only appear at EricDSnider.com, at least not directly. But the site itself produces income through the ads (click away, folks; click away!) and Amazon commissions, so it behooves me to review as many films as I can in the interest of being complete, thorough, and reliable, and thus attractive to Internet users. I’m sure I wouldn’t have nearly as many regular readers as I do if it weren’t for the fact that they can usually count on me to have reviewed whatever new film it is they’re looking for. So even if nobody pays me to see SATC specifically, there are long-run, big-picture financial benefits to reviewing it.
So am I any different from just a regular ol’ blogger? I dunno. I am on the press lists and get invited to screenings, which a lot of bloggers aren’t. Then again, some are. Some of my reviews appear in legitimate professional enterprises such as Salt Lake City Weekly, so maybe that makes me legit. As has been pointed out, the Internet has leveled the playing field. It doesn’t really matter who does it for a living and who does it for fun. What’s important is whether they’re good at it.
June 5th, 2008 at 10:52 am
Great comment, Steve Zimmerman. Well written!
June 5th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Personally, I love the fact that people get so angered with Eric because it provides Eric with insight he wouldn’t otherwise have (or at least be able to remark upon) . I believe that angry letters and upset people have allowed him to become a better social critic (Snide Remarks, I think, often reflects that). So kudos for angry weirdos for allowing a person to get insight into the human condition. Eric peers inside the mind of others and what do we get? Hmm…spiders? hornet’s nest? Cheese whiz? Anyone?
Of course, I wonder if it sometimes causes an excess of crotchety for poor Eric, kinda like how working customer service causes you to hate all humanity.
Discuss.
June 5th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
I’ve been reading Eric’s stuff since 1997 and I think that his level of crotchetiness has definitely increased over the years. Whether this is the result of overexposure to stupidity or a simple byproduct of the aging process I can’t say.
June 5th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
#3 Steve, Eric used to be one of the primary critics at a smaller city paper, and so should probably count as a professional, even if he’s only part-time now. And I agree, it wouldn’t make much difference to me since I trust him more than other critics. But I do consider him more than just a blogger critic beause of his background.
June 6th, 2008 at 7:46 am
It’s true, Eric, I do come to your site (for movie reviews) because I know that you generally review just about every movie I’ve heard about, and many I haven’t. And although I haven’t been to a movie in the theater for more than two years (little kids will do that to you), I read every single review. Mostly because I want to be current with popular culture, and I think you are hilarious.
I come to your site for humor because, well, see above. You are a very good, very awesome, very funny writer. I’ve been a fan since Daily Universe days, when the Monday paper (with Snide Remarks) and the Friday paper (with Police Beat) were the best of the week.