The Future of Film Criticism
Audiovisual criticism. A type of film criticism that outlines common or opposing thematic elements between films through the form of a video essay. These video essays may contain a compilation of a famous director’s signature shots, a close analysis of a film’s structure, or common tendencies in cinema, often with a persuasive tone. By presenting a criticism visually, the critic is offered more affordances that are not possible with print-based criticism. Namely, the ability to illustrate a concept or idea with specific film clips that support the critic’s argument. Thus, creating videos with an essayistic character that are equivalent to academic papers.[1] These video essays also use voice-over narration to capture the action of multiple film excerpts. There is more room for interpretation with text-based criticism, whereas audiovisual criticism offers a single perspective through a visual medium.
The goal of audiovisual criticism is to provide an analytical critique in which the object of study can be watched as it is being discussed. During this evaluation, specific film clips and film scenes are often re-purposed to help provide a commentary or analysis of a film’s structure or patterns. By juxtaposing video clips, the audiovisual critic can depict common trademarks from excerpts of different films. For instance, Rishi Kaneria’s video essay Why Props Matter (2015) showcases the significance of film props, illustrating that these objects have the power to reveal a character’s emotion or even tell a story. Here, Kaneria shows a wide array of film props on-screen as he is discussing them.
Two props that achieve different objectives are the match cut between the prehistoric bone to the orbital satellite in 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), in which these props convey the progress of mankind. In contrast, the plastic bag floating in the wind in American Beauty (1999) is a prop that represents the hidden beauty in the world through the eyes of the character Ricky Fitts. In both films, depicting these underlying themes are achieved simply with props, and without the use of character dialogue or exposition. This is another goal of audiovisual film criticism, to contrast film motifs in different films. By cutting video clips together, a pastiche of an entire filmography or a particular style of filmmaking can be easily summarized.
Conversely, some of the main challenges of this type of criticism are that online audiovisual media have historically been reserved for artistic and entertainment purposes, and have little footing in traditional scholarly reviews.[2] Accordingly, scholars and well-established film critics are more likely to engage with print-based film criticism. Additionally, people who are not technologically-inclined may be unable to create this form of video criticism or understand its affordances. Audiovisual film criticism is scarce and inconsistent, unlike traditional text-based criticism.
The main types of video essays include personal review, supercut, vlog, scene breakdown, shot analysis, structural analysis, side-by-side analysis, recut, subject essay, academic supplement, and desktop video. Notably, a personal review is the simplest form of audiovisual criticism in which a reviewer gives their personal take on a specific film. On the other hand, a supercut is an assemblage of film images that fit a certain category. For instance, Jacob T. Swinney’s The Dutch Angle contains poetic supercuts of different clip scenes from a wide array of film genres, all using the Dutch tilt camera angle in a rising fashion. This criticism takes the form of an obsessive compilation in which the entire oeuvres are recapitulated.
Similarly, Conor Bateman’s Containing the Madness: George A. Romero’s The Crazies is a structural analysis audiovisual criticism that solely focuses on scenes in The Crazies (1973). In this structural analysis, Bateman picks apart the arrangement of the different character arcs and storylines in The Crazies (1973). The family and civilians have a far different narrative journey than the government and army men, who eventually die. This is a different type of criticism from a personal review as it focuses on the film’s structure rather than elements of the film itself.
In stark contrast, the vlog is a type of video essay in which a critic provides an opinion and social commentary on a film rather than an analysis. This style of criticism comes in the form of a direct address with voice-over narration, footage of the editor, and often has a comedic tone for entertainment value. Two apt examples of this type of audiovisual film criticism are the popular Youtuber series’ Cinema Sins and Screen Junkies. Cinema Sins picks apart errors or inconsistencies in films in a comedic way, whereas Screen Junkies has an “Honest Trailers” web series that parodies the “film trailer” format and nit-picks film scenes and thematic elements. In opposition, a scene breakdown criticism is a close evaluation and analysis of a particular scene.
Distinctively, a shot analysis deconstructs a single shot or a recurring type of shot in a film. In contrast, a side-by-side analysis is a video essay in which two or more film clips are visually juxtaposed. A “recut” is distinctive from all other video essays in that it blurs the line between video essay and video art. A recut is a re-purposing of film text, where the author takes a film and through various edits makes it their own abridged project. Contrariwise, a subject essay is an audiovisual criticism that explores a particular filmmaker’s entire body of work. By compiling the most characteristic shots from a particular filmmaker, this form of criticism can reveal a recurrent motif across a director’s entire body of work or juxtapose specific films.
[1] “Film Studies in Motion: Aims.” Film Studies in Motion: From audiovisual essay to academic research video, July 2, 2016.
[2] Bateman, Conor. “The Video Essay as Art: 11 Ways to Make a Video Essay,” May 22, 2016.
