“Some books are undeservedly forgotten; none are undeservedly remembered.”
— W.H. Auden
So, I saw Suicide Squad. It was okay. There were some issues with motivations, a few plot holes, some unnecessary scenes, but Amanda Waller and Deadshot were pitch perfect, Harley was a fair interpretation, and the Enchantress was a decent villain, if nothing we haven’t seen before. DC seems to be heading in the right direction, which makes me hopeful for the upcoming Wonder Woman and Justice League projects. It wasn’t bad.
There’s a lot coming out about Rotten Tomatoes and how they may or may not be biased against DC Movies. That’s not quite what I want to talk about. I’ve seen a lot of anti-critic sentiment floating around over this, and just in general. I find this almost unsettling, mostly because criticism is kind of what I do here? And while I certainly lean more towards academic criticism than professional, the two are becoming more and more similar. In some areas, criticism is slowly becoming an art form in itself. But there are people who question why we need critics at all, if they’re not going to reflect the popular consensus? In my last “The Case For…” post, I had some video resources, and I have some this time too. First, we’ll be exploring Kyle Kallgren’s review of F For Fake which is a review of Orson Welles’ last completed film as Director. While most of the review is focused on the nature of art and its relationship to its creator, there is quite a bit about critics, called “experts” in this case, and their relationship with “fake” art. After that, I’ll be going back to the Nostalgia Critic with his video essay “When Are Critics Wrong?”, discussing the disconnect that sometimes happens between critics and audiences.