Traditional Culture Encyclopedia - Photography and portraiture - How to write film reviews professionally?
How to write film reviews professionally?
Link:/question/20571461/answer/1556175.
Source: Zhihu.
The copyright belongs to the author. Please contact the author for authorization for commercial reprinting, and please indicate the source for non-commercial reprinting.
A reader once asked me this question, which I found easy and difficult to answer. It's easier said than done. You can write whatever you like. I never thought there was any N-word policy in writing film reviews. It's hard to say that writing film reviews is a very personal matter, just like watching movies. Many things can only be understood. What this article wants to say is not so much how to write a film review as how to write a film review. Writing a film review, in the final analysis, is to record the feelings after watching the movie in words. As long as you don't fall asleep while watching the movie, you will have a feeling about the movie: even if you fall asleep, it is a reaction, which may prove that the movie is not boring on the whole. There is no limit to the length of film reviews (the media will have them), and they can be as long as two or three sentences. An English film forum held a one-sentence film review competition, and some winners actually condensed their comments into one word. Recently, I am compiling a European and American film guide, a western disc, which is deeply touched. It is certainly not easier to write short reviews than to write complete reviews. Among the thousands of viewers who express their opinions after dinner, only a few people sit down and turn their ideas into articles, and the media can make even less use of them. If several influential media invariably use the same style, it gives people the impression that film reviews should be written like this. For example, in the United States, the film reviews of mainstream media are generally around 1000 words (translated into Chinese). About two-thirds of the space is about describing the plot, and the rest belongs to evaluation, but there is no fixed formula for the way of evaluation. I was influenced by this when I first wrote the film review. When I put pen to paper, I naturally left this trace. I don't think it matters, it's just a style. Perhaps because our literary criticism tradition has been suppressed for a long time, our definition of some concepts is not as clear as that of the west, but we like rules and regulations very much. Just say "film review" What is "film review"? In a narrow sense, it is an English film review. "This kind of article is written for people who watch movies, not for people who make movies or study movies. It is generally published in mainstream media or fan publications. Roger is the only film critic who won the Pulitzer Prize, but his articles are simple and straightforward, seemingly homely. He is very productive. He can write five comments every week, but all of them are short, and translated into Chinese is about 700 words. His popular line makes him the most widely read film critic, and more than 200 newspapers in the United States authorize reprinting. He also has a TV program every week, half an hour each. On the contrary, like Elvis Schell in The New York Times, he likes to show off his sweet words, and he wants to confuse readers. If you don't believe me, you can read his comments on Matrix 2. Pauline. Kyle is probably the most influential American film critic. She raised the film criticism to the artistic level. From the 1960s to the end of 1980s, her comments were a banner of American culture. Her writing is a bit like Zijun's, with a feminine elegance, but her views are sharp and sometimes mean. It seems that the scope of our film criticism is wider, and some very emotional essays should belong to essays in English with the help of movie lyrics; Some of them are theoretical studies and belong to the nature of papers. English should be film criticism or film theory. Readers who are used to reading one type of prose tend to dislike other types-people who are used to reading prose will think that others have no personality; People who are used to reading papers will naturally feel that there is no depth without a large number of technical terms and footnotes. In my long commentary, both "Artificial Intelligence" and "Citizen Kane" are more than 10,000 words, but the former is actually very emotional, and the latter is originally a paper, but I try to avoid the style of the paper. Assuming that I use all the terms I should use and attach the source of each sentence, it is estimated that some academics will be convinced and this article will lose 99% readers. This is my limitation. Most of the media think it is a kind of strength, while universities and research institutes think it is "you are still young and need to improve". In the past, the comments of the older generation were very similar to those of our Chinese class in primary and secondary schools. We first came to the background of the times, then the outline of the story, the central idea, and finally the specific analysis. As a way of writing, this is ok, but it is not the golden rule. I try to avoid this writing, for fear of framing myself in a table. Usually, after watching a movie, I will think about what I feel most, perhaps the story (such as the pianist), perhaps the way of telling the story (such as Mulholland Road), perhaps the performance (such as the wicked woman), perhaps photography or photography (such as "The Shadow of the Vampire for 400 years"), perhaps there is no story or performance at all, only pure feelings (such as Regio's trilogy of life). A movie can talk about many things, but it should talk about the parts that move you. Filling in the blanks is comprehensive enough to express your views, but it will not be a good film review. Do film critics need literary theory knowledge? It is certainly a good thing that people who make a living from this have a theoretical basis, but between knowing a little theory and not knowing it, I would rather choose not to know it. When I first set foot in literary theory (as well as aesthetics and philosophy of auspicious light), it is easy to feel suddenly enlightened, thinking that I know everything, but I don't know that I have only learned one of many theoretical schools. Each theory has its own uniqueness, but when pushed to the extreme, it will become barren. It doesn't matter to me how to write. It doesn't matter whether I have the ability to write poetry or not. What matters is whether what you write has written content. Speaking of this "thing", there are too many mysteries inside. Because we grew up in the environment of "unified thinking and unified caliber", many readers can't help but look for the same views as themselves. Once there is disagreement, there will be a fierce response. Gu Xiaobai seldom writes critical film reviews, but once he does, it will be wonderful, and so will his comments on the two heroes. It's normal for some netizens to disagree with him, but this netizen's feelings are obviously hurt because Gu Xiaobai spoke ill of his idol. It's really unnecessary. You can express your different opinions. In the Internet age, no one can monopolize the right to speak. But as long as there is no "highly unified" policy, there will be different opinions in the world, especially the comments on a film. If a person can't adapt to the environment of freedom of speech, it's best to avoid this environment or create a small environment of unified speech by himself. The controversy caused by "Mobile Phone" shows that there are many fans with this mentality in China, first of all, Cui Yongyuan. As a film critic, he made two taboos: first, you must watch the movie before you are qualified to comment, otherwise your views are castles in the air; Second, you can refute the film in any strong language. If you think it is libel, you can resort to legal protection. However, he suggested that the film bureau should ban broadcasting (in original words: I don't even understand why the film bureau can let him pass and show it nationwide), which is extremely harmful to the film industry. Sadly, in Sina's survey. Com, as many as 40% people agree with his point of view (maybe just agree with some of his remarks). ) Let's reason: If Cui Yongyuan was a film censor in the Film Bureau, he would definitely make this film. If some of these 40% netizens have the right to shoot this film, then this film will not be released. So many people are so willing to deprive the public of the right to watch a movie, and at the same time, many people shout that there is no good movie to watch. Do you think there is a causal relationship between them? Who can blame? When I first saw the results of this survey, I was really sad: China audience, we only deserve to watch movies, because we always want to ban works we don't like. It is conceivable that if these 40% people can veto it with one vote, there will be no movies, no novels, newspapers and articles published in China. You know, no movie in the world can get 100% recognition and praise. If a politician gets 60% public support, he is very popular. If one person can deprive everyone of the right to choose, then any form of creation can rest. Of course, Cui Yongyuan only hinted that he is not a film censor, and he also has the right to express his views, so our reaction may have gone too far. However, this national mentality is a big obstacle to making movies or writing film reviews. The so-called film reviews more than a decade ago were reduced to propaganda that said good things in the circle; Now, in order to shock the world, some people deliberately oppose everyone. In fact, their mentality is the same, and they are all catering. The most important thing for a real film review is to express your true feelings. There is no right or wrong feeling, there must be opponents, but there is a difference between reasoning and absurdity, and there is a difference between normal and unfamiliar. Pauline. I disagree with 80% of Kyle's opinion. I believe that most people in the film industry will not agree with Streep that she can't act from the neck down, but she has her own logic. I don't necessarily agree with her conclusion, but I appreciate her unique perspective. The real skill of film critics lies not in following other people's advice, but in discovering other people's neglected masterpieces. When Bonnie and Clyde were left out in the cold, Kyle waved the flag and shouted that The Lord of the Rings III was an excellent work, and no one would regard you as a genius. (I didn't encourage everyone to deliberately play the devil's advocate) I think a good film critic should be brave enough to recommend the legacy beads. Introducing The Lord of the Rings is a job, but when you find that a director who is not afraid of tigers leads a group of actors who won't let girls scream everywhere to make a touching work, the pleasure is unparalleled. It is our duty to introduce such works to you.
- Related articles
- Weifang Gaomi has several high schools in detail! !
- What's the difference between a TV director and a producer? Who is older?
- What part-time jobs can college students do?
- It's hard to find a bosom friend. Which episode is Han and Lao Liu's success?
- Which is better, Anshan Vision or DreamWorks?
- Do you have a good topic for writing a law paper?
- Selection skills of office wall art
- Where are the calligraphy and paintings suitable for hanging at home? Where are the calligraphy and paintings suitable for hanging at home?
- The latest txt complete works of Love in Qing Palace
- Yuhang District, Hangzhou has implemented 36 policies to help enterprises get rid of difficulties and further reduce the burden on enterprises.