How to Spot a Bad Critic | Video Essay

by Panzer
"I am Vinz, Vinz Clortho, Keymaster of Gozer."
"Volguus Zildrohar, Lord of the Sebouillia."
"Are you the Gatekeeper?"
Well... I guess I'm now.
This video is sponsored by Squarespace.
Look, I know this video may be interpreted as an attack.
But let me be clear—I’m not calling out anyone specific.
"I mean all of you are rubbish."
Jokes aside, do NOT harasse whoever you believed to be a bad critic.
It makes you a piece of sh*t, and it helps spread their non-sense, anyway.
This video is just a tool to help you spot bad reviews
formulated from my personal experience of
doing the exact stupid sh*t I'm about to criticize.
Finally, remember: The dose makes the poison.
One, two, or even ten videos do not invalidate someone's entire body of work.
It's only a problem when it is a *persistent* trend.
With all that out of the way, let the gatekeeping commence.
[ Part One ]
Let's address the most common misconception:
that film reviews are just opinions.
"I don't like it" does not mean "it sucks".
A vibe-based statement like this is not critiquing anything from the film.
How you feel about a movie does not necessary reflect the film's quality.
Consider an extreme case:
Roger Ebert’s review of The Birth of a Nation (1915).
Directed by D.W. Griffith,
the film pioneered the use of moving cameras, crosscutting, and dynamic close-ups.
As Ebert pointed out, it codified and demonstrated the language of cinema
for all future films to follow.
The film is also hated for its overt racism,
portraying the KKK as heroic saviors of white farmers
against rampaging freed slaves,
a legacy still infamous to this day.
Facing such contradiction, Ebert wrote:
"All serious moviegoers must sooner or later arrive at a point where they see a film for what it is,"
"and not simply for what they feel about it."
Ebert's thesis, as I understands it,
is that "Birth" is a masterfully crafted film in service of evil.
Through its artistry, the film made real world impact.