Movie Critics

In general, I think it's a good profession...when done correctly.

The general consensus of a critic is to praise movies with powerful messages and to dismiss those that do not. This is not consistent with what the American public finds appealing. For an example I am going to use the movie I just recently viewed, Ice Age 3: Dawn of the Dinosaurs.

According to many critics this movie was dull, shallow, did not make good use of 3D, etc. I cannot comment on it's use of 3D (because I did not see it in 3D), but I found the comedy fun. This is definitely a great family movie. There are a few jokes for an older audience in there that I don't think children are going to pick up on. The animation was absolutely beautiful. I found myself liking this one better than the first two.

I don't think critics realized the purpose of these movies. They are about a group of creatures who naturally would never be together (mammoth, sloth, saber-toothed tiger, and possums) working together and living together. They get into danger and have to work together to get out of it. So what if the plots were similar throughout the three movies? Ice Age is their cash cow and they'll milk it for everything it's worth. But it's not like the movies are worse than trash.

Each movie viewed needs to be viewed differently. A family movie cannot be viewed in the same light as a horror film. An animated feature cannot be viewed in the same way as a live action film. An original story cannot be viewed in the same fashion as a movie based on a television series or a book (some people like to claim that it can, there is no way to view each through completely different eyes). Critics need to realize this before commenting on these things.