The Art of Criticism 1: Inane Ramblings

I thought that at some point I should start to address why I don't have any interest in writing "reviews". In this age of blogs and ready information all anyone seems concerned about is whether a new movie is good or bad. People write pages and pages about the "beautiful cinematography" or the "well written script" with really knowing what that means or even if its important. What makes art interesting (and criticism even more so) isn't assessing the value of it, that's part of the simple act of watching.

Without pigeonholing exactly what criticism is (its much easier, yet probably meaningless, to say what it isn't) because it can take many forms, I merely want to express that it should enhance appreciation or understanding in some way. Writing a "review" as a means of convincing someone to go see something does not count as criticism.  What got me thinking about this was reading Matt Zoller Seitz's article about two of my favorite critics: David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson. They consistently get me thinking about films in new ways and their blog is one of the best the internet has to offer. The article itself though is a critique of much of modern film criticism and is in that way its own form of film criticism.