We live in the age of instant opinion. And we’ve certainly all seen or even participated in tossing out one-hundred-and-forty character summations of the latest movie we’ve just seen, or the developments in a new episode from a hot TV show. But for Cannes Film Festival chief Thierry Fremaux, he sees a problem when reactions arrive instantly on Twitter after a movie is over.
“Writing a review, is about formulating and putting down a thought, and can’t be summarized in 140 characters written as soon as the credits have stopped rolling,” he told Le Film Francais (via Screen Daily). And he also adds the rush to be the first to say something about a movie, particularly at the Cannes Film Festival, has "created a permanent race against the clock between journalists and amateur neo-critics."
READ MORE: The Top 10 Films Of The 2015 Cannes Film Festival
“Everything is accelerating. The instantaneity leads to hasty, excessive, definitive judgements. The critics are tweeting during projections. The nature and the function of the profession are changing. By acting like this, I’m not sure the profession is doing itself any good,” added Cannes president Pierre Lescure in an interview with La Croix.
And I’d say they have a point. There is something to be said about digesting a movie, letting it linger, and taking a moment to consider everything it has to offer before mashing your fingers on a mobile device with a quick statement and then moving on. But the flipside is that Twitter isn’t just one-way communication, and that it can open up a conversation around a movie that traditional media isn’t always able to.
Where do you think social media fits with film criticism or does it? Hit the comments section and share your thoughts.
Ohh I hate the way IndieWire comments work. You can\’t read more than two lines at a time. I meant to say "I think most people are smart enough NOT to let twitter snap judgments determine their future plans…"
Yeah but positive reviews are as prevalent as the negative ones. I followed Cannes on twitter and no bad reviews made me not want to see any of the films. I think most people are smart enough to let twitter snap judgments determine their future plans to see a movie.
But not everyone deserves to have a voice. Not everyone is educated in film. The idea that the Internet was going to allow so many previously unheard voices to shine is a fallacy; what it has done is show is that the selective hiring of professional writers and critics wasn\’t just about elitism. It was about paying people who knew what they were doing. Because an idiot with an iPhone who has never seen a movie from before his birth year does not deserve a voice that can compete with some film critic who has been dedicated to the art form for thirty years.
Of course social media is "hurting" film criticism because now the critics have to compete with the voice of the general viewing public. I do think there are many negative issues in making rushed decisions on the value, weight or what have you of a piece of art but the ability to let the people make an opinion and for that opinion to get as loud a voice as some critics is quite possibly a great model.
For a long time only a handful of voices were allowed to be heard and now we have millions or billions of people who can be heard and share their opinions. Instead of worrying about the negative impact why don\’t we focus on how we can shape and add to the positive impact?