Ryan McNeil
A few weeks ago, I wrote a review of a film that had been making good box office. In this review, I sat on the opposing team’s bench and said “I don’t know what y’all are talking about – this film ain’t all that good”. With that, I had posted one of my most popular posts in months and opened the gates to one of the busiest days of traffic on this site. For a second, I saw the appeal of speaking up for the minority vote, and the allure of voicing dissent.
The moment passed though.
For a while, I’ve looked at contrarianism with a leery eye. For film discussion, being the curmudgeon who doesn’t like the films everyone else does has been sullied for a good long time thanks to one famous soul who has made it his mission to turn contrarianism into performance art. Let’s leave him out of this though.
It seems like every passing week, I come across another post that says “This film you all like? This director? Not nearly as good as you think.” Day-in and day-out, another pontiff takes to another podium to declare “Look people! Your emperor has no clothes!!” Sometimes it’s a film that’s generations old, other times it’s a buzz-worthy film that hasn’t even opened wide. Nothing is sacred, nothing is safe. If the crowds are gathering behind a fixed point, someone somewhere feels the need to knock that point off its axis.
So what to make of this growing trend?
I believe it’s important to vocalize both sides of an argument. Not only to fully analyze the work at hand, but also to further the dialogue and allow for a more informed opinion by all. After all, if everyone sat around talking about how awesome something is, then all we’d ever take away from film is how awesome it is. Unfortunately, when everything is awesome, nothing is. So indeed, having someone stand up and say “I hate to disagree…” Is valuable, and should never end.
Unfortunately, the increasing problem with those who disagree is that it has become harder and harder to respectfully disagree. Some, like the aforementioned side-show of a critic, have turned the whole position into a twisted game of “LOOK AT ME!”. Not only does this work counter to the idea of furthering the conversation, it makes it difficult to trust anything the speaker brings to the conversation. Do they actually deeply believe in the side they represent? Of are they getting their rocks off by being the centre of attention?
Let’s assume the former.
The writer might well think, from a place of total honesty that some artist or piece of art is “not that good”. How are they supposed to get the attention of everyone else that disagrees? Well often that comes by upping the venom – be truly antagonistic, use pejorative and hyperbolic language and pull no punches. Wherever possible, employ sentences structured around “I know ________, but _________”. If an argument needs to be tempered with outside influence and reputation, so be it. Rules are meant to be broken after all, so if it helps one’s position to bring into the fray the work’s fans or the work’s reputation, then why not? All the more chance that the writer will get people’s attention. The bigger the opponent, the harder the punches will have to land…so load up and let ‘er rip.
As a consequence, what we get is piece after piece that feel mean-spirited, self-serving, lacking perspective, or some combination thereof. The line between “I don’t like this” and “This is bad” is blurred at best, and sometimes ignored entirely. What’s left is something that is inarguable, and something that does more to call attention to the speaker than it does the overall debate.
This is the current state of contrarianism: it has become a position that lacks respect, understanding, and honesty. It is less about challenging popular opinion than it is about being a squeaky wheel and getting the grease.
I would never suggest that arguing in opposition should be avoided entirely – far from it. Some of the most fascinating films and filmmakers are the ones that leave audiences divided. Remember that on many an episode of my podcast, I’ve begun the conversation by asking guests to name a film others like that they don’t. What I would suggest, is that those who want to step up and say “That thing you love isn’t as good as you think” take a moment and a breath. Are you yelling at the crowd because you think they’re failing to see key details, or are you yelling at them because you think they’re all crazy?
The former allows you an opportunity to illuminate the masses…the latter just makes you look crazy.
Proceed with caution and proceed with respect. Otherwise you risk being written off as an ill-informed grump.
“Some, like the aforementioned side-show of a critic, have turned the whole position into a twisted game of “LOOK AT ME!”.”
Hmm…interesting that you should bring that up. When you tweeted “Guess which film I didn’t like” with regards to The Lego Movie, I assumed that’s what you yourself were doing.
“The moment passed though.”
Helps if you read the whole post. Also, I said “This movie didn’t work for me” *not* “This movie didn’t work for me and those who it worked for need to give their head a shake”
The latter is the tone a lot of discussion is taking lately.
I agree with a lot of this but one thing stood out.
If the theroetical person is being truthful then there should not be a line between ‘I hate this’ & ‘this is bad’. Those two statements mean the exact same thing in the world of art.
Yes and no.
You’re right to point out that end-goal of an artist is to affect the audience, and that if the art leaves no mark (or a bad mark even), then the art “fails”. But there have many times when I see something that is technically proficient and doing what it sets out to do – I’m just not its intended target.
There were around 40 films last year I saw in theaters that I thought were bad. And I probably only truly hated around 5 of them. The rest either were too mediocre to feel much about at all, or were harmless/something someone else could enjoy/tried really hard but missed the mark, or some other effort that made it not worth hating.
We’re definitely in the same boat on this topic, Ryan. I grow weary of the endless posts saying “I know everyone loves this, but you’re stupid” or something similar. There’s nothing wrong with having a contrary opinion. Like you mention, those can lead to interesting discussions if the writers think through their points. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case a lot of the time. It’s much easier to write off something and say “it sucked” than to really dig into why it didn’t work for the person. Sadly, I doubt the trends will change.
I remain hopeful that they will change. I might be hoping in vain though…
I think what seperates the contrarianism we all go through from time to time from someone like Armond White is how far you let it consume you and ultimately define you. Among our group a lot of the time we remember what each other hated more than what they liked.
If you spend a significant amount of hours longer talking about the movie than it took for you to suffer through it, there’s probably a problem.
If you find yourself in your arguments distancing yourself further and further away from the elements you actually DID like as a side effect of your contrarian opinion, there’s a problem.
If a significant part of your piece is attacking the audience rather than examining the audience, there’s a problem.
Of all things, I saw a different animated film, that Mr. Peabody movie, and it’s slight, but one thing I took away from it is a simple reference in the film that if you hate something, it’s because it reminds you of something you hate about yourself.
I don’t think that idea is entirely valid, but it’s definitely worth exploring, and if more contrarian arguments were reflective, the contrarian argument would become a constructive experience rather than a destructive one…
…albeit in many writers cases, far less entertaining. Whenever you are in a far minority, those few anti-articles out there can be comforting. You gotta vent, you gotta get the nastiness out of your system and move on one way or another before you start calling people garbage men.
I don’t think that idea is entirely valid, but it’s definitely worth exploring, and if more contrarian arguments were reflective, the contrarian argument would become a constructive experience rather than a destructive one…
This. A million times this.
“Unfortunately, the increasing problem with those who disagree is that it has become harder and harder to respectfully disagree.” That would be my biggest problem. I don’t expect everyone to agree with everyone and as you said it’s rather good they don’t but how hard it is to look at it as their opinion as an opinion like yours? A lot, apparently.
I also agree that many times while doing so people come off as pushing their own agenda, rather than adding anything worthwhile to the discussion.
I think part of it comes from the fact that in order to be heard over top of the crowd, one has to yell a little louder. I wish that wasn’t the case though.
This was a marvelously insightful post! I have never been shy about expressing my opinion, but I have always strived to be respectful of others and never call anyone stupid for liking something (even if I think it myself).
LOL.
But I do think that everyone should be able to write what they truly feel about a film and shouldn’t have to write ‘nice’ reviews simply to appease the masses. I loved that you didn’t like The LEGO Movie. I hated the hell out of Prisoners! I think that you should be able to defend your feelings though, and I don’t listen to anyone who spouts a barrage of “this movie sucks” because their opinion isn’t a fully formed one, and that is just annoying to read.
Everyone should be able to voice their discontent with an offering – you’re right to point that out. I just think we need to dial back the venom.
For example, I believe that everybody should be forced to read their Twitter feed once every few weeks. They should look at everything they’ve said and see it all strung together. They should then imagine themselves as a follower of their own feed, and more specifically – a follower who only follows 100 feeds or less. What would all of these tweets coming down double-barrel look like to a reader? A bit obsessive, perhaps?
Sadly, I think this kind of shouting (fanboys AND haters) is a product of internet culture. I’ll come right out and call it link-baiting. People will do anything for traffic. On their personal sites, it makes them feel important. On commercial sites, it generates ad revenue. Either way, it devalues real criticism. The truth is that nobody unreservedly “loves” or “hates” anything. But it takes time and intelligence, not to mention actual writing chops, to write an insightful review of a film that doesn’t resort to cheap hyperbole. Sadly, this environment has made me more and more reluctant to “join the fray” anymore. Even describing it as a fray means it’s a competition and a battleground, and I’m just becoming more and more tired of that.
Actually James – my position might have been unclear in trying not to point fingers. Besides He Who Shall Not Be Named, I didn’t want to call anyone out specifically…but what has this subject brewing in my head is a growing trend to take down “the old guard”.
So this time around I wasn’t as focused on “Here’s Why The Avengers Sucks” so much as I was thinking of posts that argue “Why Martin Scorsese isn’t All That”
Thoughts?
Well, if your post’s picture has anything to do with it, then yes, that is what triggered my reflex as well. It seems like there are two ways to get attention: try to be first with a review of something (and a review might not even be a review, it could be casting news, or rumours, or a set visit), or take down something or someone that everyone else seems to like. I’m not interested in participating in either of these activities if that’s what “writing about film” devolves to.
Then again, as you would later go on to mention on Twitter, you aren’t much interested in “writing about film” period. So…..
That’s a cheap shot, Ryan. Just going through one of my regular (and maybe more frequent) convulsions about the state of what passes for film criticism online. I agreed with your post. So much snark and snobbery to contend with in addition to just poor writing online. It’s enough to sap even the most positive of us. 🙁
In a way, though, it’s understandable because it’s one of the few times when you have a different perspective to bring to the conversation about something. The internet is so saturated with writers now, how can any one of us single ourselves out? My blog doesn’t have any f-ing traffic. When a film comes out that everyone loves and you love it too, what is there you can say that people will actually notice?
I’m not saying we should all be writing “Here’s why this sucks” pieces. I agree with you one hundred percent, Ryan, that there is a difference between presenting an opposing argument with actual data and disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing. But the unfortunate reason why this type of writing is so common now, why film criticism has turned into a “fray,” is that there are just too damn many of us.
I more often come at movies from the other end of the minority. Seeing the ones that everyone writes off as being bad, and still finding some good in them. One of the biggest problems, or maybe benefits, of contrarianism is that it is often the criticism that is remembered. Even though I may not personally remember the critics themselves (though I do also remember Neil DeGrass Tyson and his contrary Gravity physics tirade), but I do remember there being a big to-do about mainly a single dissenting voice against movies like Gravity and 12 Years a Slave. There’s nothing wrong with a dissenting opinion, but some days it’s hard to tell whether that dissenting opinion is from a different perspective on the art of the film, or if that opinion is flavored more towards that all too tempting traffic bump from being the voice speaking out against the crowd instead of just another blip in a sea of voices.
And by the way you presented your own opinion towards the Lego Movie, it was definitely clear to me that it was informed by a different perspective, and the traffic bump was just icing on the cake.
This is part of me (and my husband) declaring 2014 the Year of Positivity. I don’t actually need much help to be positive; I like most things. I’d much rather be the contrarian the other direction, as Bubbawheat mentions – I’ll be the one over defending Speed Racer and the Resident Evil series. In some ways, that’s more fun because I’m not constantly tearing things down, but it does sometimes lead to being the target of “how can you like that, you’re stupid” attacks myself. It seems that the negative position is seen as the more “smart” one a lot of times, as if movies are all out to pull the wool over our eyes and if we like them, we’ve succumbed to their nefarious wiles.
The ultimate problem, as you’ve gotten at here, is that internet culture demands consensus – if anyone disagrees, they must be wrong, because if they’re right, then WE’RE wrong. Everyone agreeing doesn’t lead to good discussion, but neither does disagreeing like this. Thank goodness there’s a corner of the internet with you and the people who’ve commented here and a few others who see value in more measured discourse. I’m just tuning the others out this year. It’s not worth the noise.
Interesting post, Ryan. Top 20 films of 2013 I posted this week is probably contrarian and unconventional. But it’s not that I want the list to be different just for the sake of making myself more interesting, it’s simply a reflection of my taste. So I wouldn’t have it any other way!
I don’t want to publish a list just to make other people happy, or to fit in with the norm, it has to be honest.
For the sake of argument, if someone’s top 10 films of 2013 contains the 9 best picture noms, and they loved them all, then I’m fine with that. For me, part of the movie bloggers goal is to be a contrast to the Oscars, and not just blindly follow suit. I didn’t think 12 Years a Slave was a masterpiece, so I shared by critique on my blog. Not to be self-important, but because that’s my honest opinion.
But the internet definitely has its fair share of keyboard warriors, who want attention with controversial opinions, maybe they weren’t loved enough as a kid, and makes them feel important to yell at filmmakers. We live in an age where everyone has an alias, and can say anything online without consequences, so there’s bound to be a few rotten apples.