TENET - General Information

An original action espionage film releasing in IMAX on August 12, 2020
User avatar
Posts: 373
Joined: March 2019

User avatar
Posts: 826
Joined: February 2012
A Borges man wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 9:22 pm
Also, Dana Stevens complaining about having to go to a press screening for their Job is so cringe. That is her job! WTF?
Aren't these critics a little worried about their future employment? I assume they need new BIG movies to review, no?

User avatar
Posts: 9399
Joined: December 2011
ignore, Vader kinda nailed this below
Last edited by antovolk on June 30th, 2020, 6:40 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Posts: 19930
Joined: June 2010
Location: The White City
Insomniac wrote:
June 30th, 2020, 6:18 am
A Borges man wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 9:22 pm
Also, Dana Stevens complaining about having to go to a press screening for their Job is so cringe. That is her job! WTF?
Aren't these critics a little worried about their future employment? I assume they need new BIG movies to review, no?
This is the entire point, though. They're not only scared for their health by attending critic screenings (FYI, Dana Stevens is based in NYC...), they also feel if they opt out of attending these screening they're hurting their careers. It's an uncomfortable ultimatum.

Add another wrinkle, they feel compromised writing what could be glowing reviews for movies knowing it could influence people to see movies in theaters when they feel it is not safe to do so.

And to be clear, as of June 30th, cases are still increasing in 35 states with 40,000 new cases. ICU capacity in several states is getting full. The last 6 days are the 6 record high days of Covid-19 in the United States. These are valid concerns. How about show a little empathy instead of throwing stones.


-Vader

User avatar
Posts: 826
Joined: February 2012
I think A Borges man were referring more to this tweet:


User avatar
Posts: 19930
Joined: June 2010
Location: The White City
That is pretty unprofessional, yikes.

But I see constant negativity thrown towards press on here, and as much as I too get frustrated they're going after Nolan as much as they are, I get it.


-Vader

User avatar
Oku
Posts: 3551
Joined: May 2012
Vader182 wrote:
June 30th, 2020, 6:39 am
Insomniac wrote:
June 30th, 2020, 6:18 am
A Borges man wrote:
June 29th, 2020, 9:22 pm
Also, Dana Stevens complaining about having to go to a press screening for their Job is so cringe. That is her job! WTF?
Aren't these critics a little worried about their future employment? I assume they need new BIG movies to review, no?
This is the entire point, though. They're not only scared for their health by attending critic screenings (FYI, Dana Stevens is based in NYC...), they also feel if they opt out of attending these screening they're hurting their careers. It's an uncomfortable ultimatum.

Add another wrinkle, they feel compromised writing what could be glowing reviews for movies knowing it could influence people to see movies in theaters when they feel it is not safe to do so.

And to be clear, as of June 30th, cases are still increasing in 35 states with 40,000 new cases. ICU capacity in several states is getting full. The last 6 days are the 6 record high days of Covid-19 in the United States. These are valid concerns. How about show a little empathy instead of throwing stones.


-Vader
But don't critics/journalists hold all the power here? People don't get blacklisted anymore when they come out and speak up on controversial matters, they get praised for it and it encourages to step up and do the same (ex: #MeToo).

If critics come out and say, "A piece of non-essential entertainment is never worth a single human life. Do not see this movie.", or even if they do go see it but decide to put out negative/lukewarm reviews in the name of saving lives, there is nothing that WB can do to counter that.

Especially considering how reactionary and sensitive-to-backlash of a studio WB is, it wouldn't dare even hint at hurting the journalists' careers when theirs is a cause that is just and noble and about saving lives, for fear of the immense outrage-storm that that would cause.

User avatar
Posts: 19930
Joined: June 2010
Location: The White City
In a sense, yes. However, if a critic says "this movie is amazing, but you shouldn't see it" the value of caution is diminished by the overall positivity of the review. Especially when factoring in most people only look at RT/Metacritic ratings and quotes, rather than reading full reviews.

Too many critics would find intentionally lying about the quality of a movie ethically problematic, more likely is a boycott.... but I imagine there's too many hungry mouths for that to work either, as that only works in total solidarity and individuals don't want to risk their careers without confidence the collective will do this.

To be clear, when I say "hurt their career," I mean they'd be passing on opportunities to other people and hurting their relationships with editors and/or publishers, not WB.


-Vader

Posts: 226
Joined: August 2019
Edit;

I got confused. Sorry
Last edited by Lincoln on June 30th, 2020, 4:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 9399
Joined: December 2011
Probably was a roundtable interview then? Is there a link to the Fotogramas article?

Post Reply