“In any event, the issues and dilemmas facing the characters, the gestures in the direction of ‘psychology,’ are mere scaffolding for a large-scale money-making operation. What passes for film criticism is so prostituted in the US at this point that hardly anyone can state the obvious: that this is a bloated, pointless and dull film, which simply kills (truly murders!) a few hours in the viewer’s life.”
Aside from disagreeing with this movie being “pointless”, this is bad-faith criticism. Captain America: Civil War might be long, but “pointless” it’s not. It’s about how conflicting ideologies, even within friend circles, can tear people apart. I’ve seen that play out in real life numerous times. How is that “pointless”?I know this is a Marxist website, hence it’s going to have a slant, but knocking something for not meeting a pro-Socialist agenda does no one favours and looks petty. Because guess what? Most movies fail at being Socialist, even great ones! Criticizing an action film for failing that is spiteful. It’s also, like I said, bad-faith criticism.
I’d single the review out, but it’s a microcosm of a grander trend. In in an age of global access to information, we can hear any take about media that we want. And not all of them are sincere. It’s an issue I’d have equally with an MRA site criticizing a film for being “woke trash” because of its casting. You can’t disregard something well-regarded for not fitting into an arbitrary checklist. Life doesn’t work that way.
Since I dwell a lot on Marvel content, I’ll mention that this doesn’t stop with The MCU. The Indiana Jones movies are about a white colonist who steals artifacts and houses them in an American museum. They’re well-loved, and enjoyable, but that’s inescapable. It’s also bad-faith criticism to state that these movies suck because of that alone.
Why stop there? James Bond, one of the most-beloved spy franchises, is about a British operative who’s a misogynist and a violent aggressor. Mission Impossible is pro-CIA dribble. Even Netflix’s Stranger Things franchise can’t escape its “US good, Russia bad” subtext in later seasons. This is all valid criticism, and I won’t discredit it offhand, but using it to invalidate these franchises is dishonest.
Since I dwell a lot on Marvel content, I’ll mention that this doesn’t stop with The MCU. The Indiana Jones movies are about a white colonist who steals artifacts and houses them in an American museum. They’re well-loved, and enjoyable, but that’s inescapable. It’s also bad-faith criticism to state that these movies suck because of that alone.
Why stop there? James Bond, one of the most-beloved spy franchises, is about a British operative who’s a misogynist and a violent aggressor. Mission Impossible is pro-CIA dribble. Even Netflix’s Stranger Things franchise can’t escape its “US good, Russia bad” subtext in later seasons. This is all valid criticism, and I won’t discredit it offhand, but using it to invalidate these franchises is dishonest.
Yet it happens constantly. It’s easy to call out the far-right version for being so blatant, especially since it makes no sense, but the left isn’t guiltless. Bad-faith critiques exist everywhere, and it’s up to everyone to call them out. They’re not only obnoxious, they also actively ruin the movies. They especially ruin them when studios go and try to “remedy” them, ultimately butchering authorial intent and obscuring the real issues at play.
This is most-apparent in how classic Disney movies are discussed. Were these movies riddled with issues? Yes, and it’s foolish to ignore them. But does that mean they aren’t classics? No.
That’s not being addressed, however. Instead of Beauty and the Beast being criticized for having a female lead who doesn’t grow, the discourse surrounding its “flaws” hinge on a misreading of Stockholm Syndrome and how Belle’s relationship with Beast is toxic. Instead of Aladdin being criticized for its insensitive portrayals of Arabs, its discourse falsely centres on how Jasmine lacks agency. Even The Little Mermaid, which has its issues surrounding the Three-Day Cycle trope, is now focused on how Ariel’s a spoiled brat who disobeys her father and learns nothing. This isn’t to discount these critiques, but they shouldn’t stop there.
This is most-apparent in how classic Disney movies are discussed. Were these movies riddled with issues? Yes, and it’s foolish to ignore them. But does that mean they aren’t classics? No.
That’s not being addressed, however. Instead of Beauty and the Beast being criticized for having a female lead who doesn’t grow, the discourse surrounding its “flaws” hinge on a misreading of Stockholm Syndrome and how Belle’s relationship with Beast is toxic. Instead of Aladdin being criticized for its insensitive portrayals of Arabs, its discourse falsely centres on how Jasmine lacks agency. Even The Little Mermaid, which has its issues surrounding the Three-Day Cycle trope, is now focused on how Ariel’s a spoiled brat who disobeys her father and learns nothing. This isn’t to discount these critiques, but they shouldn’t stop there.
In an old piece for The Whitly-Verse, I mentioned my issue with the phrase “problematic”. It bears repeating that the term doesn’t accurately explain what’s wrong with entertainment. Instead, it’s an excuse to not engage with it in a constructive and healthy way. Yet so many bad-faith critiques fall victim to that. And it’s frustrating.
I’m not saying you can’t analyze media critically. I’m as guilty of that as anyone else! But using a litmus test that doesn’t factor in gradients is unhelpful and gets nothing positive accomplished. If anything, it’s a deterrent to helpful and honest feedback about content like narrative structure, character consistency, visual literacy and coherency and basic filmmaking techniques. These are as important, if not more important, as any lens you can apply to a piece of storytelling.
Go ahead, be critical! Acknowledge when something has aspects that don’t entirely work! And mention if something is outdated or insensitive! But don’t let that stop you from engaging with entertainment on its own terms. Failing that isn’t only bad-faith criticism, it’s also not honest criticism. And nothing reeks more than dishonest criticism becoming the default norm.
I’m not saying you can’t analyze media critically. I’m as guilty of that as anyone else! But using a litmus test that doesn’t factor in gradients is unhelpful and gets nothing positive accomplished. If anything, it’s a deterrent to helpful and honest feedback about content like narrative structure, character consistency, visual literacy and coherency and basic filmmaking techniques. These are as important, if not more important, as any lens you can apply to a piece of storytelling.
Go ahead, be critical! Acknowledge when something has aspects that don’t entirely work! And mention if something is outdated or insensitive! But don’t let that stop you from engaging with entertainment on its own terms. Failing that isn’t only bad-faith criticism, it’s also not honest criticism. And nothing reeks more than dishonest criticism becoming the default norm.
No comments:
Post a Comment