Careful With That "Snob" - It's Fragile

Snob - "one who has an offensive air of superiority in matters of knowledge or taste" (Merriam-Webster)

An odd pattern has emerged in the realm of film criticism. It's nothing new by any stretch, but it carries with it a greater meaning now than I ever recall it having before. Bloggers, forum writers, tweeters, and facebook walls all present it before their followers/readers as a scathing attack. Hostile in approach, it sets the tone for the review like few others - the ANTI-Critics Review.

You know them better than you'd like to admit. Like me, you've probably written a few of them. They come upon us like a wave of air on a windy day. Critics fall seemingly unanimous upon a film, the triumphant calls scream out - "Critics are _______, this movie was AWESOME!" Of course the opposite, in which you replace the word 'awesome' with 'horrid' or any derogatory term you can think of, works just as well.

Or, as I like to call it, the "Anti-snobs snob" position. The general components of these posts are rather similar. The reviewer differs from the general consensus (but not universal - nothing ever is) of critics, and therefore feels the need to rage against it. The social group is wrong, obviously making the post writer right. I've talked enough about this notion to make your head spin on a swivel. Arbitrary sycophantic reviewing meant to inspire a certain attitude in the reader with no leeway for constructive analysis and discussion.

The perception of critics as a bunch of snobs sitting in their mother's basement rambling on about films the general public have never heard of is a mainstay of popularity. We all know directors and writers love to sneak in the pretentious twit whenever they do a theater scene (see The Fighter) in the hopes of getting people laughing at them. Why? Well obviously because anyone who likes things that involves subtitles wears their sweater around their neck in a faux 90's hipster routine. Not to mention that natural air of smugness. Just the other day I told someone that I appreciate them for knowing why they liked a particular movie and not just saying 'because.' Oh the audacity! Perhaps I should retire to a small hole in the ground (with cable) and void society forever.

No. Somewhere along the line having an opinion wasn't enough. We had to have the right opinion (whatever the hell that means). To prove that our opinion was superior, those who disagreed with us earned the label "snob" and were cast aside. Thereby proving we were not snobs, because we were superior to them. If you read the above definition you ought to be scratching your head right about now.

All of this has done a fun thing in the world of film - it has annexed and destroyed the power of the critic. Horrible filmmakers can get away in mildly successful films because the main force that exists to monitor them is being slowly unformed. Well, I'm here to tell you right now. You don't have the right opinion, because you assume there is one. Don't shy away from stating what you like or dislike about a film, but be prepared to have people disagree with you. Accept them in, and try to see things from their side.

It is not enough to have an opinion. You must have one you can defend.