The internet is filled with media-review content. A function that used to be delegated to professional critics with some sort of relevant credentials became a free-for-all occupation. On the one hand, there’s a lot of content out there that misses the point of the media they comment on and is generally questionable in terms of the value it provides. On the other hand, such a postmodern twist on the traditionally elitist role is much more fittingly reflective of the subjective nature of media, and in my opinion, adds value to the media itself. Although one has to put more effort into selecting their review content these days, I’d say the trade-off is worth it. But what is the purpose of review content in the postmodern world?
I’m certain there are some critics/reviewers that would claim that they do it in order to assess the objective value of a piece of entertainment. I personally think there’s no such thing. There could be objective elements that factor into the value of a piece of entertainment (like the amount of time, money, effort that goes into creating an element of it or how many cultural references or philosophical ideas are presented in it). But in order for that objective value to translate into somebody’s experience of a piece of media, the viewer must be able to access it through their personal cognitive filter. This won’t always be possible, for example, due to the viewer not having the necessary knowledge to pick up on cultural references in a given piece of art/media. You could perhaps claim that you are assessing potential objective value present in it, but even then, you never know when you might be missing something due to an inevitable bit of ignorance.
Although a lack of knowledge can impair someone’s ability to understand what they are reviewing, it is easier to correct (by educating oneself), or to counter (by another reviewer pointing it out). There are other even more subjective elements to viewing/reviewing media that are more difficult to reconcile, really blurring the concept of objective value in art/entertainment.
For instance, one person may love an eccentric performance, when someone else might find it stupid, and then who is right in their assessment of the quality of that performance? Just like with greater themes, details like the subtle elements of an actor’s performance, may be dependent on a viewer’s personal capacity for accessing it. Precisely what that may mean in some cases is very difficult to define, because it can be both complicated and very subtle. But to give a vague example, it could be that a certain body language quirk may communicate a lot to someone who knows a person with that quirk in real life. Meanwhile, it may look weird and out of place to someone who does not. Such specific subjective differences in perspective render a practically objective evaluation of media/art impossible.
That said, I still think there is some practical value to reading or listening to reviews, if you choose them strategically. For example, if you know from listening to them for a while that a particular critic has a similar taste to yours, then you know that you are likely to enjoy the content they praise. You may also notice other patterns exhibited by a particular reviewer. Maybe they have a good eye for cinematography, for example; in which case, you can rely on them to point out beautifully-looking films.
More specific examples might be things like sense of humor or tolerance for more extreme themes, such as graphic violence. It takes regular viewing of somebody’s review content in order to assess a commentator’s tastes accurately. But once you learn a particular content creator has a similar sense of humor or a similar level of tolerance for gore as you do, you can trust their recommendations/warnings about a piece of media to be relevant to you.
Although I sometimes benefit from such things too, I personally like to watch review content for another reason entirely. I just love the discussion element of it. I find that discussing a piece of media not only might open your eyes to things you might have missed about it, but also gives you time to meditate on its content. You may find that something you thought was quite void of meaning was actually quite compelling, or you might find that you are better able to articulate (and thus understand) how aspects of a film/media-piece affected you, since you spend more time thinking about the feeling it left you with.
All this can enhance your experience of entertainment media and make a particular piece mean more by cementing it in your memory. This won’t matter as much to everyone, but I propose the question — what’s the point of watching a film only to flash through it and forget it a week later? Sometimes that may be the point if you just need temporary escapism, but usually I like to take something away from the art/media I engage with, in hopes that it somehow enriches my inner world, even if only a little.
Learn more about What’s the Point of Reviews?. The internet is filled with…