What defines a film critic as such? Is it simply transcribe the opinion of a film in print or in the range of alternatives of new information technologies? Look what film critics and readers looking for a critique? These are part of a series of questions to try to define the critical and space with those who perform in society, because in reality they do, but sometimes do not know. For example, one that raises its review of the latest release in theaters to blog is called film buffs, and readers win, win "respect."
For scholars in this field the term of moviegoers are too big, not enough to see movies, but go into it have a body of knowledge that allows you to decode all the signs that a film shows us. But what they see, is that a dar alguien las aseveraciones de un film demuestran el sentido del cine, que es provocar al espectador, y éste al compartir su opinión genera debate, y el círculo sigue y el cine se mantiene vivo.
Eel error, es cuando caemos en la egolatría de “ese film es malo porque no me gustó” y no argumentamos, no somos objetivos, no educamos al público, y ese debe ser el sentido de la crítica, formar al espectador y lograr que la gente aprecie el buen cine, es el compromiso que los jóvenes que la hacemos debemos de firmar, es parte de ser vanguardistas. We occupy the space between the filmmakers and the public do want to see them interested in what you say, but sometimes they deny it, otherwise it would not be reading this editorial, we have a power and a huge responsibility, because as said Isabelle Huppert in the Lima Film Festival "if the critics did not exist, people would go less to film."
0 comments:
Post a Comment