Advertisement
In what they’re trumpeting as an exclusive, Defamer reports that the Detroit Free Press has elected not to replace their recently forcibly retired film critic Terry Lawson, and will fill his coulmn space with wire reviews:
We called the Detroit Free Press this morning and learned from a (very confused) HR rep that “We are not planning on replacing [Terry Lawson] at this time.” Very interesting. By our research, all of the other Top 20 newspapers in the United States have at least one major, well-known critic (yes, even the Arizona Republic). However, The Freep’s move clearly signals that there’s a changing tide in the amount of importance (and budget dollars) local newspapers allocate to coverage of the movie business.
The real news here may be that Defamer managed to publish 267 completely snark-free words about anything, let alone the decline of print film criticism. Associate editor Molly Friedman even closes with the seemingly sincere lament that “it still saddens us that there’s not enough room in the budget of a Top 20 newspaper to send someone to the movies a few times a week.”
In all seriousness, the Detroit Free Press‘ move is the latest in an epidemic of regional newspapers dropping their film critics. This is clearly a problem in the short term, but may turn out to be a positive on a longer timeline.
There’s no question that smaller films have the potential to be hurt the most by the wildfire-spread of wire reviews, especially when it comes to films of specific regional interest. But in the longterm, the hope is that dedicated moviegoers who are accustomed to a relationship with a no longer practicing local critic will go online, where they can develop new relationships with critics based not just on geography, but maybe more significantly, based on genre concentration and personal taste.
Kevin Buist
FLAME + CITRON Review
Christopher Campbell
Happy Halloween Links. Today in Film...
Brandon Harris
5 80s Literary Adaptations Worse Than...
Kevin Kelly
John Krasinski, Brief Interviews With...
Karina Longworth
SpoutBlog, Now Available in Book Form
Paul Moore
October 31, Karina’s Last Day
Lauren Wissot
Sasha Grey Interview
We’ve had a bit of trouble getting this episode to go through the iTunes feed, so we hope this re-post will fix the problem. The original post, with episode description and embedded player, is here.
filmcouch-114
While I really hope you’re right on that account, I’m hesitant to say that progress will be nearly as rapid as online writers and critics hope. By and large, regional ties are still staunch, and it’s a great irony I think that while print is desperately trying to re-localize coverage, they are also de-localizing it with regards to specific niches, particularly the arts niche. Reference, for example, hometown paper, the AJC. Those of us in Atlanta now interested in a regional voice of film criticism turn to our alternative weekly Creative Loafing, but I bet you money that more or less, at least right now, word of mouth is playing a bigger factor than are online critiques.
Again, I’m pulling for that thought too, that dedicated readers will find out their sources online, but right now, I’m personally disenchanted with the lack of support from major papers in terms of their arts coverage for readers. And, disenchantment, when widespread, usually means one thing: no reading goes down at all.
I’m actually surprised that this trend isn’t further
along than it is — the transition from geographical
to online speciality — and I guess it’s a welcome one.
The limitations of the platform system mean that your
average critic in Hayseed, Georgia may have a provincial
style that suits your taste, but he almost certainly
hasn’t had the opportunity to see as many movies as I
have, as a resident of New York City. I couldn’t name
any film I’ve seen in the past year that holds ‘regional
importance’ unless we’re talking about some self-financed
documentary about the plight of coal workers in West
Virginia or something. I would also dispute that those
regional papers are still a crucial voice in holding
the torch for true independents. Where did all the
support for Once come this year? I remember reading
impassioned reviews on a couple of large movie websites,
and that’s more or less it. Also, you can thank the
movie websites for events like the late revival of
Zodiac — the major papers and trades are known to
scour certain sites for article ideas they can
appropriate, and that’s a good example.
My only major problem with this big trend towards the
online market is that with it comes a noticeable disregard
for editorship. Many of the sites that are coming to the
forefront in this new era have neither the patience,
resources or will to maintain writing standards
for the reviews on their site. There’s nothing worse than
sitting down to read a review that starts “Dude, this
movie fuckin’ ROCKS,” and under this new regime, those
people are free to call themselves critics.
Ryan, I know of am award-winning documentary film (about a topic far more mainstream than local coal miners) that was potentially hurt by a widely-syndicated review that unfairly represented its content. But in that case, widespread support for the film on the internet may have balanced out the problem. But Noralil is also right that there’s no guarantee that anyone disenchanted with their local papers will immediately think to look online, and if they do, the easiest to find reviews will likely be from the highest trafficked critics/bloggers, most of whom fall victim to the “disregard” that you speak of.
The more diverse the range of voices, by region, gender, age and areas of interest, the better. It’s a sorrow when one voice is repeated in dozens of publications, whether a wire dispatch or an esteemed career critic.