Hello there. Allow me to introduce and defend myself. My name is Jeffrey Sun and I’m writing for art[seen], starting today. I’ll be reviewing mostly movies (“films” to those of you who wear scarves), but if any literary or Chinese event on campus looks interesting, you can bet I’ll be there scribbling away on one of those long flippy notebooks you see in movies. Anyway, it’s the movie reviews I want to talk about. I won’t be writing any completely negative reviews. Well, I’ll try not to. I’m only human.
Wait, don’t roll your eyes yet. Give me a chance. I’m not going to be censoring myself. I’m not going to be arguing that bad movies born of cynicism or laziness or pandering are not bad movies. I’m going to be arguing that there is always something done right, and always something to be learned from. A movie is an immense undertaking, and in any organization of that size, there is going to be somebody who is doing his job well. Somebody who is trying to prove himself. Somebody whose contribution rises above the rote and into the realm of art.
Transformers had great CGI.
Step Up 2 is very well-choreographed. (I hear)
The Da Vinci Code is carried in large part by Tom Hanks’ performance, and, more fuzzily, gets across a sort of excitement about the mysteries of the past.
These are extreme examples, and you may even disagree with them. There is a strong compulsion to object when a word like “great” starts to get tossed around. But my point is this: just as there’s always be something done badly, there will also be something done well, which I’ll make an effort to appreciate. Of course, if the movie is good anyway, I won’t have to. Because here’s the thing: we’re students, not critics or fully-formed filmmakers. We must first understand what would make a movie good before we can benefit from learning what stands in its way. We must grow before we refine.
I had the idea to write reviews like this when I was trying very hard one day to find them. I wanted to find out why this movie was so loved, or why this cinematographer said he respected that movie, which all the critics were ambivalent about. I eventually found Roger Ebert, who had a way of talking about what seemed important, and who displayed an innate appreciation of film that the cold criticism of most reviewers seemed to lack. He inspired me. I wish I could be as thorough as him, as complete in my evaluation and appreciation of a movie as a whole. I can’t, but I’ll be trying.
