H O W I L E A R N E D
T O S T O P W O R R Y I N G A N D
L O V E T H E C R I T I C S
One couldn't exist without the other, but nevertheless there is some fundamen-
tal scepticism between filmmakers and film critics. While the first sometimes
feel personally attacked, the latter often believe they are being misunderstood
or not taken seriously. How can a film be judged? Are there any "objective"
criteria for writing a review? Why do people want to become a film critic and
how important is their work for the success or failure of a film? As part of the
Berlinale Talent Campus, EFA presented this public panel discussion bringing
together the young film journalists of the Talent Press with filmmakers Ken
Loach (UK) and Jens Meurer (Germany) and the critics Derek Malcolm (UK),
Aruna Vasudev (India) and Chris Fujiwara (USA) to analyse the responsibility
of the critic and the ambivalent relation-
ship between the two professions. The
session was moderated by the journalist
and author Peter Cowie.
W h y a r e t h e
c r i t i c s c r i t i c i s e d ?
Telling people that you're a film critic will usually elicit one of two
responses. The first goes along the lines of "Wow, what a great
job. You get to sit around doing nothing but watch films all day."
The second runs something like "You complete and utter bastard"
and is reserved for directors, producers and just about anyone
else in the film industry that has been burned with a scathing
review or barbed comment. Whichever one it is, it shows a general
lack of regard for the role of the film critic in the grand scheme
of cinema. Are we passionate defenders of the most important
art form of the twentieth century or a bunch of egoists leeching
off the hard work of others in order to see our name in print?
Certainly, ever since the glory days of the `Cahiers Du Ciné-
ma', it's become progressively harder for film journalism to gain
respect. As the space devoted to cinema in newspapers and
other outlets progressively dwindles and much debate about film
is reduced to soundbites from celebrity critics who know little
about their subject in the first place, it's become easy to well
criticise film criticism. So, imagine my surprise when I found out
about the `Talent Press' a programme run in conjunction with
the Berlinale Talent Campus and Fipresci. Designed to give young
film critics and journalists from around the world the opportunity
to hone their craft with the help of experienced critics such as
Peter Cowie and Derek Malcolm, it gives young journalists a
chance to know that they're not necessarily working in a bubble
and that their job can be both respected and important. The
words `respected' and `important' being used alongside film
journalism. What a shock.
Not as much of a shock as when I found out that I'd got on to
`The Talent Press'. So, there I was, with ten other people, ready to
take on the world (or at least the Berlinale) and show them what
film journalism was really about. Of course, our experienced
mentors tempered my somewhat overactive enthusiasm with
sage advice about my writing and plenty of useful tips about
where my career was going. It was certainly more useful advice
than one well-known actor admittedly after more than a couple
of drinks who recommended that I "get another f**king job."
See what I was saying about a lack of respect...
As wonderful as the mentors were, one of the greatest parts of
`The Talent Press' was meeting ten like-minded from countries
as wide ranging as Hong Kong, Turkey, Romania and Australia.
Passionate discussions about movies, the film industries of our
respective countries and everything else under the sun raged
long into the night. And, boy, were some of those nights long.
But it's amazing to know that there are people who have the
same love and devotion to film that you do and who know
that being a film journalist can be important.
We were told that one of the most important aspects of our
jobs is getting people to go and experience movies that they may
never have heard of and this is undoubtedly true. With so little of
what is made getting an actual distribution deal, there are a
number of great films that disappear without trace. To be able to
write about something and get people to see it may be some-
thing of a dream as the papers demand a five page spread for the
latest action blockbuster but it is something that is possible.
I would hope that `The Talent Press' is the start of something
that shows those who don't understand, what a good film critic
and journalist is. Someone who has a knowledge and a passion
about cinema and instead of tearing it down wants people to
experience good movies no matter where they go. I know of
at least ten young film critics who fulfil this criteria admirably.
T h e C r e a t i v i t y
o f F i l m C r i t i c i s m
At the `Talent Press' there was a great deal of debate about the
nature and role of film criticism. In particular, the responsibilities
of the critic were discussed in relation to cinema-goers and
directors, as was the ability of an influential critic to make or
break a film. I can't help thinking, however, that these views
which position critiques as stepping stones in the machinations
of marketing forces, have the potential to drain much of the vital-
ity from criticism. In stark contrast to this practical, almost
socio-economic role, I believe it is possible to detect within the
activity of film criticism something deeply creative. For me, this
creative activity begins with the simple act of cinema-going. The act
of sitting down in a darkened space and watching a series of
ephemeral and ethereal images flicker before my retina and im-
press themselves upon my mind. Some theorists have equated
this experience with the act of dreaming, but I tend to equate
the space of the cinema with a womb, but a womb always
suspended and frozen in time, a womb into which I step, lea-
ving one foot in the familiar universe and the other foot resting
on an abyss that attracts me. Balancing with one foot on exi-
stence and one foot on non-existence I peer into a film as deeply
as I can, and this peering-in is always an activity of heightened or
deepened creativity before it is a critical analysis or evaluation.
I'm well aware that the essentially creative role I claim for
film criticism runs counter to the conventional view held by
many, a view well-articulated by American literary critic George
Steiner when he writes, "The critic lives at second-hand. He writes
about. The poem, the novel or the play must be given to him;
criticism exists by the grace of other men's genius." This view
positions criticism as inherently parasitic, as something dependent
upon the creativity of others. It tends to blind people to the role
of the critic as a creator and leaves us with a portrait of them as
a reiterater or clarifier. There's certainly truth in this statement,
but my own experience as a critic tells me it's not the whole
truth. When Pauline Kael says, "I regard criticism as an art form",
I take her at her word. If artists can be defined by their desire or
need to express their feelings, thoughts and responses to others
by finding objects which act as stimuli for, or embodiments of,
what they want to express, how is it possible to keep the critic
outside
this category? How is it possible not to recognise a film
as such an object, as the stimuli that awakens slumbering emo-
tions, emotions the critic may desire to put onto the page not
simply because it's his or her job, but because there's a need to
express their personal responses to the universe in which they
find themselves. What I'm trying to say is that as I listened to the
discussions on the responsibilities of the critic and their ability
to make or break a film, I felt that the importance of these things
weighed less with me than the feeling that, at the heart of it all,
the critic is a person who brings to the darkness of the cinema
their own shapeless word, and may, if they're lucky, find in film a
place and a moment where it comes into being.
The panel discussion "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love
the Critics" sparked off some great discussions among the parti-
cipants and the Talent Press. Almost all of them, experienced
critics as well as most of the young journalists, were more con-
cerned with the dominating discourses in dominant cinema,
which is identified with Hollywood. This situation, which is com-
mon for each of our national contexts, seemed to be upsetting
for all of us. However, we were also convinced that as critics who
are in a position to write and work in a framework including
all the different aspects of cinema, it is necessary today more
than ever to speak out and to write on what we think of as
important. We are living in a time that is far from being definite;
rather, we are facing a fast, newly emerging world cinema scene
which is sometimes blurred and difficult to identify. It is intere-
sting to see that contemporary cinema is still largely character-
ised by the existing relations of hegemony between the main-
stream and the independent. However, today's cinema develop-
ments also show us that these realms do not entirely oppose or
confront each other. Instead, they might coincide at times, only
in different ways, or transgress each other's acknowledged boun-
daries, interpreting different aspects of the existing cultural
climate.
Therefore, the present situation of cinema needs constant rede-
finition, even reconstruction on many levels and film critics
should play an important role in this task. To be an advocate of
alternative or independent film will only be possible by also spe-
aking of the mainstream; positioning one not necessarily against,
but in relation to the other. This process will inevitably bring the
necessity of positioning ourselves as film critics and it will be
incomplete without collaborating with people from other fields,
like production and academia. Neither of us can afford the luxu-
ry of ignoring the others' voices. Cinema takes place outdoors
and it is necessary now, more than ever, to share our knowledge
and enthusiasm in order to understand what is really going on,
to historicize and to speak out loud. Whatever the obstacles may
be in film criticism, film studies or film production, they can be
turned into a potential, if they are revealed and turned into a
shared experience. We, as the Talent Press, stand as the eviden-
ce for this.
Pictures: EF
A, Berlinale T
alent Campus
9
8
EFA Activities
All at once and out loud!
K E N L O A C H
UK,
J E N S M E U R E R
Germany,
D E R E K M A L C O L M
UK
ÖVGÜ GÖKÇE
Turkey
L AU R ENCE BOYCE,
UK
SAU L SYMON DS ,
Australia
