Reviewing movies seems pretty easy, doesn’t it? With the advent of the internet and now the rise of blogs galore, everyone — and I mean, everyone — can be a movie critic. But then again, even before all this technology enabled people to have a voice, every single of one of us had the potential to be film critics. I mean, when audiences were leaving screenings of James Whale’s Frankenstein in 1931, I’m sure folks were giving “reviews” to their friends and families that were equivalent to our own contemporary usage of such ever-descriptive critiques as “It sucked!” or “It rocked!” In that respect, reviewing movies is easy — you see a movie, you blurt out your reaction, and you’ve got a review…of sorts. But I think trying to do this job responsibly is actually a pretty hard task if you put any degree of thought into it.

I write film criticism mainly because I love films — and not just Hong Kong films, but film as a medium. I love to talk about movies and think about them and explore possible interpretations with other similarly-interested people. Marshall Leicester, one of my professors at UC Santa Cruz and the mind behind the very popular “Films of John Carpenter” course over there, likes to pose a question to his students: “What would it mean if it meant?” In a review, I might be called to mention a low budget, pacing issues, bad acting, or just flat-out sloppy filmmaking, but when taking a movie “as is,” we have to ask what it would mean if this “mistake” actually meant something. It’s a viewpoint that I really took to heart after writing a scathing review of a Takashi Miike film in which I (perhaps unfairly) chastise not only the filmmaker, but for the imagined type of audience that would presume to enjoy such a film. Is that really what I should be doing as a film critic? I really had to reconsider my methods and what “service” — if any — I was providing with my reviews.

Of course, there’s the consumer reports angle to all film reviews, especially if you’re thinking about Hong Kong and Asian cinema, which actually takes more of an effort for non-Chinese viewers to see in their respective countries. Unless you live near a Chinatown/Japantown/Koreatown, you probably can’t rent any Asian videos in an actual brick-and-mortar store (those are disappearing, too, but I digress). Although Netflix has certainly improved to the point where you can get a lot of Asian movies either on DVD or through Instant Play, Americans still probably have to wait for a US theatrical or DVD release for newer Asian movies movies, a delay which could take anywhere from months to even years in some cases. And so, you’re basically going to have to “blind buy” a movie basing your choice on recommendations, critical word-of-mouth, and/or personal tastes. And so, a site like LoveHKFilm.com really comes in handy. In that respect, one could say that my job entails warning you off of bad films and championing the good ones. But is it really as simple as that?

I’ve written a lot of reviews for this site. I don’t think they are all great pieces of writing — some I’m particularly proud of, while others not so much. I feel like the most formulaic movies get the most formulaic reviews. While working towards my master’s degree in English at the University of Hawai’i, I reviewed a lot of Korean comedies and horror films (by request, since somebody else called dibs on all the “good stuff”), and I think my review writing mirrored those mostly formulaic movies — opening paragraph, plot synopsis, good points, bad points, final evaluation. To some degree that style endures, but when it comes to the really interesting films, I try to break the mold and write a kind of essay on the work. Is there a way I can make you look at a film differently or perhaps ask a question you didn’t consider?

The thing is, good movies are sometimes the hardest to write reviews for, especially if you have nothing to say but “Wow, that was awesome!” Bad movies, on the other hand, are often the simplest reviews to pen. For the most part, I’ve found it’s easier to come up with three reasons why a movie is terrible than to list three reasons why a movie is a masterpiece.

Spoilers are also an issue. When writing about film in academia, an essay can and should be littered with spoilers galore so you can really talk about the movie in an in-depth manner. But in a review, you’re obligated to hold back bits of information information, and, for the most part, I try to conform with that expectation. But I have to admit it’s frustrating because some movies beg to be talked about from beginning to end and thus necessitate full disclosure on major plot points. Thankfully, Kozo has provided us with the  blogs to do just that.

I think the reviews I feel bad about are the ones in which I get unnecessarily personal, either with the filmmaker (what the hell was he/she thinking?) or the viewing audience (who the hell would want to watch THIS?) — as was the case with Imprint. I know I made fun of Murderer in a recent blog post, but I was really more baffled about how all the major players involved with the film gave the distinct impression that they thought they were making a masterpiece. Murderer is a film that defies the “thumbs up/thumbs down” logic of ranking films, as I think it is is probably one of the most astonishing contemporary Hong Kong pictures in recent memory. The thing about truly bad movies is that they tend to be middling affairs, irritating in their ineptness or boring in their execution, but Murderer is so spectacularly — and entertainingly — bad that it should be placed in an entirely different category of cinema altogether.

And there, I’ve totally lost my train of thought. Thanks, Aaron Kwok.

Anyway, whether it’s a glowing recommendation, a caustic slam, a critical essay, or an attempt at some serious food for thought, the reviewer’s job can be a challenge at times. I take the responsibility — but not myself — as seriously as I can. Well, not that seriously. We do try to have fun around here.

Still, I hope I’ve provided a helpful, if imperfect service during my eight or so years on the site. Lord, I do try.

This entry was posted on Friday, October 15th, 2010 at 11:17 am and is filed under Film Criticism. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.