RULES FOR REVIEWS:
I
don’t get paid for jack diddly squattle in typing my rambling thoughts
to a blog on the interwebs. Scratch that- I do have an “ad-sense” that
was supposed to monetize this thing a little bit and to date I have
earned approximately 12 cents in the past five or six years; give or
take. They won’t pay until I’ve reached a $10 limit at the very least so
I never see a check on it. It just assures me that I have earned it and
that it exists in the middle of cyberspace collecting dust. I’ve never
received an award, I’ve never been offered a lucrative contract, and
other than few random opportunities here and there I’ve never been
offered much in the way of my thoughts on the various movies, plays,
books, and wrestling shows that I’ve written about here. So when you
read my “rules”, be aware that I’m as amateur as it gets and I’m not the
guidepost for professionalism in this day and age. What I do know is
that I will occasionally read a magazine, a newspaper, or the “official”
website of an agency whose job it is to “review” any number of things
and I am struck numb by how utterly useless these articles are in doing
the job they are supposed to be doing.
So
what is the purpose of a “review”? Some reviewers seem to believe that a
“review” is simply telling someone the synopsis of the show and then
saying whether it was good or not according to their opinion. Let me cut
to the quick on that regard: An opinion doesn’t mean anything. Roger
Ebert, who may be considered one of the greatest reviewers to ever live,
is notoriously vitriolic regarding nearly any and all horror films and
has lamented their complete lack of cultural value. He’s peppered all of
his reviews of these films with his personal distaste while being
completely ignorant to the target demographic of the film or whether the
film was a good representation of the genre. In a word: if you read a
Roger Ebert review and wondered whether a horror film would be worth
your time, you would never ever get a fair review of that film. As far
as I am concerned that makes him a bad reviewer. And far too many
writers tasked with the subject of “reviewing” a film will take that
route in their writing.
So
I write my own reviews with my own set of rules. For my faceless
readers who tell me that they trust my opinion, that they will see a
show based on what I’ve written, or that they wonder why I have the
criteria that I have; these are the rules I follow when I write and the
things I ask myself in the editing process. I always write from the
heart and I always try to be fair according to these rules. Without
further ado: THE RULES!
1. Review the Show you are seeing, not the show you want to see.
- THIS is my most important rule above all others.
- I
see it all the time. A reviewer goes to see a play or a movie and they
don’t like the subject matter. They don’t like the set because they hate
the color brown or they think an actor is “too old” to play a role or
they find a pet peeve in the show that sticks in their craw- whatever.
Or they went to a show and they wanted to see Shakespeare and instead
they got Sam Raimi. It is not my job to tell you about the show I wanted
to see- it is my job to tell you about the show that I am seeing. If a
theater decides to insert post-modern sensibilities into the tale of
Romeo + Juliet, then did they do it well or was it a jumbled mess that
confused everyone? If I watch “Evil Dead: The Musical”, did the actors
pull it off and did the gore get the crowd excited and were the jokes
hitting or is the blood not plentiful enough? My “taste” has nothing to
do with what is being presented and I may not exactly BE the target
audience… but the target audience may read what I am writing and I have
to serve as a guidepost for whether they choose to bring their money to
this product. It’s not fair of me to impart MY tastes on their decision.
Only my interpretation of what is being delivered and what
sensibilities I feel are being aimed for. Write about whether the show
achieves what it sets out to do, nothing more and nothing less.
-
2. Buy something.
-This
may seem a little odd, but I honestly don’t believe that anyone has the
right to say word one about a show or movie if they don’t put skin in
the game. You might get a free offer to see a show, but while you are
there you had better buy a concession item or two and you better not act
as though you “deserve” a freebie just because you’re writing. Some
people have told me that I deserve a free ticket because my writing
helps to sell a show, but the truth is that I have nothing to write
without the show to begin with. So I often buy my tickets- I support the
arts when I can and the only time I even accept a freebie is when I
simply can’t afford a ticket because I’m on a low a budget. And, even
then, I occasionally scrape some funds together to see a movie or a play
because I have a special interest in it. The added bonus is that I can
say whatever the hell I want because I laid down some skin to watch it
or see it or read it and that makes it, essentially, “mine” to do with
as I choose. Buy something, for heaven’s sake.
3. Don’t take notes during the show:
I
really HATE it when I see people writing in a journal as they’re
watching a show. They see something, they jot something, and they’re
missing something else that’s happening. You want to keep it fresh, wait
for intermission or set change or whatever- but don’t take a note in a
book while you’re watching a show. You are MISSING something if you do.
If you’re there in a “professional capacity”, then act like a
professional and absorb the full experience before you start writing an
opinion on something that might become further informed as the show
progresses. I’ve read several reviews that have left me completely
confused because the plot they describe is NOT the plot taking place on
the stage, or a line of dialogue is taken completely out of context
solely because the writer glommed on to something and started to take a
note rather than pay attention to the rest of the scene.
4. Take a Program or Read the Credits:
This
shouldn’t even need to be a rule, but here’s the thing: I’ve seen names
misspelled, I’ve seen characters misidentified, and it’s annoying as
hell. Even with the program, I occasionally make a mistake- but I always
try to correct it in the editing. A Program for the play or the Credits
of a film will often give you the most basic information you need to
have in identifying who is involved with what. With the creation of
IMDB, this is even easier for reviewing films because the names are
there to do research on and see other projects the people are involved
with.
5. Identify and be specific-
- I’m
going to give an example of what I mean for this- I dislike James
Cameron’s film “Avatar”. Not only do I dislike it on a personal level,
but on a professional level as well- that doesn’t negate the fact that I
realize it is an amazingly beautiful film with fantastic special
effects. It doesn’t mean that I don’t acknowledge the action or that
certain actors in the film do a good job of presenting the story. What
it does mean is that I call out James Cameron for writing a near carbon
copy script for “Dances with Wolves” and created such a generic and
passé series of driving motivations that he literally chose to use the
word “unobtainium” in order to describe his MacGuffin. I’m describing
precisely what I did not like about the film, precisely where I found
fault, and exactly why it didn’t work for me. But I also praised
precisely what I thought was incredible and worthwhile for someone who
WOULD like the film and that there is value in it.
- Too
many times these writers simply try to create an art form unto
themselves in tearing apart something they don’t like. They offer zero
credit to anyone or anything and the review becomes about them or about
their cause. I don’t have to love everything, but there was hard work
put into a production and the good stuff needs to be pointed out just as
much (probably more) as the bad.
-
6. DO NOT SPOIL:
- There
are ways to talk about a movie or film synopsis, to talk about specific
performances, to talk about specific “moments” without spoiling the
rest of the film. I’ve read a number of reviews where the writers just
flat out tell you the whole of the story, including the twist ending and
then stared at the article wondering if I should bother seeing the
movie or show. What’s the point? It’s already been spoiled.
- First
off- these reviewers are occasionally wrong. They totally miss the
point or they see something happening that is not happening. It’s
confusing and you feel at a loss, but chances are more than likely they
had their head down while taking notes and missed something. Don’t spoil
the show.
-
- Star
Wars: A New Hope features the story of a young man who joins an elderly
old warrior to help rescue a princess from the Galactic Empire- we need
never read about the death of Luke’s Aunt and Uncle because that is a
twist in the story, a dramatic moment that loses all impact the moment
the audience is informed of it. Don’t talk about the twists in a review,
don’t spoil the ending, and don’t spoil the show.
-
7. Be fair: “It’s Personal- take responsibility for it.”
- A
review is always a personal interpretation of what the reviewer is
watching, reading, or listening to. Not only that, but the art they are
reviewing is a personal thing that is being created by someone(s) who is
likely going to read those thoughts if they are published in any medium
(even a lowly blog on the interwebs). As much as I may wish to say
something “isn’t personal”, it is and I’m responsible for what I write.
As such, I have a responsibility to the performers, writers, and
producers to be fair in what I’m writing. To view their product on a
level where, even if I don’t understand it, I’m being fair with it and
I’m not letting my personal feelings interfere with an honest review.
But that doesn’t mean “lie”- be honest and responsible for that honesty.
If I don’t like something, I owe it to myself and my credibility to say
that I didn’t like it and to explain why. If I do like something, I owe
it to myself, my credibility, and any readers that what I am writing is
worth their time.
-
8. Keep a ratings scale:
-Thumbs
up, thumbs down, that stuff doesn’t fly for me because there are so
many levels to regard whether something is good or not. Here is an
explanation of my own ratings scale and what each rating means. I use a
five point rating scale based on the Netflix *Star* program,
mostly for ease of effort. Much of the scale is subjective and
occasionally may seem inconsistent when set against my reviewing
history.
Let me be blunt; I enjoy B movies, zombies, horror, bizarre comedy, and
thrilling adventures… A family drama surrounding the personal problems
of a daughter, son, mother, or father is not necessarily my cup of tea.
It’s not something that cries out “Come see me!” and then sends me
running to my piggy bank in hopes of cashing out- but they can be really
good and really well done. On the other hand, something appeals to all
of my senses but maybe came off a little oddly- something wasn’t perfect
and it could have been any number of things, including my particular
mood.
However much it counts, here is an explanation of my scale:
-5.
This is something that moved me, thrilled me, and excited me and was
everything I want out of a product on any given level. It’s almost
entirely subjective since it does, actually, touch on my own personal
interests: IE; “Army of Darkness” is as much a 5 movie as is
“Casablanca” because they are both great examples of what they promise
to be and want to be. I get just as much from one as I get from the
other. To me, this is the best of the best of the best.
-4.5.
This is a great product and touched on nearly everything I could want.
However, there are a few flaws from a technical level or maybe some
pacing moves a bit oddly. It’s not enough to detract from my general
enjoyment, but it is worth noting. *Note* The Star Wars movies
are imperfect bits of joy and most of them collectively fall here for
me- the writing is cheesy, the dialogue is stilted, and the acting is
often mere mahogany, but there’s something special for me here and
that’s all there is to it.
4.
This is still a great product but may not necessarily be something that
gave me everything I could want. Or it gave me everything I want, but
isn’t necessarily a great product.
-3.5
This is good. Worth the money, worth the time and worth the bother.
It’s not great, but I left with more smiles than frowns. This is what I
refer to as a “decent popcorn muncher”- you can sit back, have a good
time, but it’s not really going to stick with me for too long afterward
unless it’s something I’m particularly interested in. I might pick it up
to own but I’m not going to go out of my way to buy it- in a live show,
it means it was a decent few hours spent just lazing about with nothing
particularly interesting to note from either a good or bad standpoint.
It just sort of exists for me. *Note* While I hate the film
Avatar, on a fair scale the film succeeds far more than it fails and it
would fall here for my reviews- but a clearer view would be the Phantasm
films, for me.
-3.
This is the last rating in which something is actually considered
“Good” for me and the scale slips down from there. This is the decent
popcorn muncher that I’m not going to bother picking up unless it’s in a
bargain bin, the matinee show that I’m going to watch in the cheapest
way possible, or a performance that just doesn’t strike me as
interesting. At the risk of sounding cruelly honest- I’m not seeing
anything great enough or awesome enough to really grab my mind and keep
me interested beyond a pleasant time-wasting experience. It’s still not
bad, it’s just that middle of the road “smiling shrug” that I’m having a
decent time. *Note: I’m pretty sure this is where I would have rated
the latest Ninja Turtles Movie.
-2.5
Dull, but with a few interesting bits… maybe a half-decent performance,
or an interesting couple of effects, or a nice tune- something kept it
from totally and utterly sucking and it scraped the bottom of a 3 in
regard to grabbing my attention. It’s not a solid recommendation, but if
someone finds what I’m writing to be of interest to them then they may
get something out of the movie, book, or show that I didn’t. *NOTE: This
is where I’ve previously rated the movie PIXELS.
-2.
Boring. Not only boring, but predictably boring and uninteresting. The
performances might be decent, but the movie or the show is just plain
boring. Nothing is happening, nothing ever happens, and nothing is ever
going to happen because nothing matters. This is the quirky British
snobbery of every Hugh Grant film made after “Lair of the White Wyrm”
and often constitutes a 2-hour plus running time where nothing ever
happens. It’s not gadawful enough to warrant hateful vitriol because
nothing is ever going to happen in this movie. Ever.
1.5
The (.5) is usually because someone figured out how to use the camera
appropriately sound was synched, people were acting, and there was a
cohesive story to follow along. I’m normally yelling at my television.
If I’m in a live theater I will sit there with a stunned, shocked, and
horrified look on my face and will shake my head as I walk out. No one
is going to be shocked when I write about what I saw and no one is going
to be confused. I /will/ be specific and I will start to call people
out for wasting my time. I’m cruel like that.
1. This
is the holy grail of awfulness- this is Birdemic, this is Manos, this
is the place where bad things will not be allowed to exist in a vacuum
unto themselves. I want to hurt these movies when I see them and I want
to make fun of them, mock them, and drag them through a thesaurus of bad
adverbs in order to make my point. This is the bottom of the barrel.
0:
This is rare- but there are those special gems where things are so
utterly awful that they don’t even deserve mocking. They deserve
nothing. I’m done… just done.
