A Bluffer's Guide to Film Critique

Film critique is not quite as easy as watching a movie, it requires more brain power than that. Some people feel that they can shut off their brains when watching a movie, however critics do the opposite. It’s important to note that everything in a movie is there for a reason, and as a critic it is your job to think of why it might be there, the filmmakers intended impact on the audience, and how well it was achieved (if at all). So after reading this article, watching a film should be not quite as easy as before since you now know what to look for, you will never watch a movie in the same way again.

Criticising a movie can amount to more than whether or not you liked it. You could discuss in detail which parts of the movie you particularly liked and which parts you would have changed if you had been behind the camera. And I know what you’re thinking, "I couldn’t do any better". But with the right amount of knowledge and the ability to form an opinion (which I assume you all have) anyone can have the skill to choose the parts of a movie they would have done differently. Now I’m not saying that this will turn you into the next Stephen Spielberg, but with a certain amount of technical know-how and a level of awareness when it comes to Hollywood conventions and audience response, anyone can recognise a hit from a flop.

At the very least this article will allow you to be able to generate conversation at a dinner party. Film is probably the most popular form of art (yes, art!) in the 21st century and is always a good topic of conversation. And at the most this article could spark an interest in the subject and inspire you to find out more, as film critique is an interesting hobby to have, even if you’re not writing reviews, you can still form an interesting and valid point of view about a film that could come up at your next dinner party (assuming you hold regular dinner parties, of course).

One of the most recognisable aspects of a movie, maybe apart from the storyline, is the genre of a movie. No one needs to be told what a romantic comedy is, or a horror, or a western. We know all of this from experience alone and we can attribute each of these genres with a feeling as, with each genre comes an intended affect. Romantic comedies are supposed to make the audience feel good, horror films are intended to scare the audience, and westerns excite the audience with action and adventure. And even though these genres may appear obvious to us, there are certain aspects to each which help us to define the genre. These are called "generic conventions", which is just a fancy way of saying "things that pop up in each movie within that genre". For example, blood, murderers and blue lighting are all generic conventions of horror, as they all appear in most horror movies; therefore ‘Scream’ (Wes Craven, 1996) is a conventional horror movie as it holds each of these factors. Movies can also cross over into other genres to form "hybrid genres" such as ‘Back to the Future: Part 3’ (Robert Zemeckis, 1990), because as well as being a sci-fi/ comedy movie, it also holds many generic conventions of westerns, being set in 1885 in California, having shoot-outs and cowboys and Indians.

As I have mentioned, the storyline of any film is probably the most blatantly obvious aspect of any movie as the plot is what you explain to friends when you first mention a movie. However the actual structure of a movie is different to the story, and can be harder to determine. All film’s narrative structure can be separated into two categories: linear (when the story runs in chronological order), as in ‘When Harry Met Sally’ (Rob Reiner, 1989) or non-linear (not chronological), like in ‘Kill Bill: Vol. 1’ (Quentin Tarantino, 2003). The basic narrative structure of linear movies (and some non-linear films) can follow this pattern:

Exposition > development > complication > climax > resolution.

The exposition defines the characters, setting, themes and possible storylines for the film, the development defines each in more detail and the plot thickens as the characters set out on their adventure, the complication is when something goes wrong and something (e.g. a life, a relationship, someone’s reputation etc) is in jeopardy. The climax of a movie is the most adrenaline filled part of a movie, perhaps in an action film, the biggest fight will take place, or in a romantic comedy, the characters will kiss for the first time, and then comes the resolution when equilibrium is restored and the characters live happily ever after (in most cases). However in non-linear movies, the story tends to jump around more and they do not often follow this pattern. This is a narrative theory, and theories are essential to your knowledge as a film critic as you have the freedom to agree or disagree with each and then see to what extent each theory is used in any film and how affective it is.

Another theory that could come in handy is Vladimir Propp’s character theory that can be allocated to most films. He found, in several stories, seven common characters: the hero, the villain, the "donor" (someone who "donates" useful information or tools to the hero for their task), the helper (a character who helps the hero in their task), the princess (not always literal, most of the time just the romantic interest who is the reason for the mission), the dispatcher (the one who sends the hero on their mission), and the anti-hero (a character who seems more heroic than the true hero and therefore takes credit and tries to woo the princess). This character theory can be assigned to most films (and books too), for example, ‘Star Wars’ (George Lucas, 1977): Luke Skywalker = the hero Darth Vader = the villain Ben Kenobi = the donor Han Solo = the helper Leia Organa = the princess (literally) Ben Kenobi = doubles up as the dispatcher too Han Solo = can also be seen as the anti-hero. As I say, this can be related to almost any film, so why not try it with your favourite film, or a film you know well?

Something else to look for in a movie is the film’s themes and motifs, and the question to ask in order to find these themes is "why did the filmmaker make the movie?" All films are made for a reason, sometimes it’s purely for entertainment, but all films carry a certain level of "verisimilitude". Verisimilitude in its simplest form is the extent of reality shown in the text (film) and how far the film reflects any current issues. A good example of this is ‘The Day After Tomorrow’ (Roland Emmerich, 2004) as this is addressing a current issue: global warming. This is the main theme of the film as it appears relevant in all scenes, however other themes shown in the film are the relationship between father and son which, although prominent, isn’t substantial enough to call a theme, and so it is therefore called a "motif". The different themes and motifs shown in a film can be subtle or obvious, but no matter how noticeable they are and how much you consciously take note of them, these things are what attract an audience and relate to an audience. Everyone can relate to a parent/ child relationship and so by writing a relationship like this in the script, the writers have automatically got the attention of the audience on a personal level. As for the main theme of global warming, it appears very relevant to today and as it is constantly appearing in the news, so it must be of interest to people. This is probably why the film was made. Filmmakers such as Ken Loach (Kes, Sweet Sixteen) are famous for making films which carry worthy social issues and he does this partly by removing any Hollywood clichés and making the scene feel as natural as possible by using natural lighting mostly and real locations and often, real people (not actors). So, again, pick a movie you know well and see if you can work out why it was made, what techniques the director/ writer used to represent the theme or connect to an audience and how affective is it?

A good critic will take the time to look closely at the film, and not just at the story or the themes, and at first you might need to watch a film or a scene several times to pick up everything. There are four main things to look out for on a close study of a film: cinematography (the camera angles and movements), sound, editing (transition between one shot to another) and mise-en-scène (anything that contributes to the atmosphere: setting, costume, make-up, lighting etc). And it is through these things that the themes are presented and the story is told. Most cinematography is done at "eye-level" and editing done with a simple cut from one shot to the other. This way the audience don’t get distracted by it and can therefore concentrate on the story. However, films such as ‘Moulin Rouge’ (Baz Luhrmann, 2001) have fast paced editing and flashy "in your face" cinematography, and it could be argued that this style of cinematography is more likely to absorb an audience as the use of a lot of close up shots makes the audience feel more a part of the story. This is another interesting debate for your dinner party!

Sound can be inviting to an audience and can also inform them of the type of film they’re watching. A film such as ‘Hot Fuzz’ (Edgar Wright, 2007) is a good film to watch in order to get a good feel of how sound can be used in films. The director uses loud sound effects on something as mundane as hanging a coat on a peg to translate an action genre feel to the movie before the action even begins, and since this is a comedy it also has comic effect as the director lovingly pokes fun at the action-cop genre. This gives a good sense of the film, subtly bringing an action movie feel to it (a la Hollywood) and lets the audience know what to expect in terms of both comedy and action. The use of music in movies is always very carefully chosen in order to bring the right atmosphere in the scene, the music in a scene tells us what to expect as in horror movies, the music gets louder and more intense at the approach of a murderer or monster. Some characters even have a theme tune like Darth Vader in ‘Star Wars’ or the shark in ‘Jaws’ (Stephen Spielberg, 1975). These tunes simply define their presence in the scene.

These are just a few pointers and opinions of mine about some of the movies mentioned. However, in order to be a good film critic, you must form your own opinions about various movies and the theories that could apply, and to do this, all you have to do is take heed and watch!