The Critics

Last week, I saw 'Lady in the Water' as a sneak preview thing on Monday night.  I personally enjoyed.  Mrs. Xpinionated not so much.  Then there were these ridiculously annoying girls (I would refer to them as women, but I can't imagine their maturity level would qualify them as such) who hated the movie.  They got up as soon as the credits started rolling so they could run to the front of the theater and get on their phone.  Yes, I understand they didn't like the movie but they ran out like they had somewhere better to be in their sweats.  But, actually, they just wanted to trash the movie as quickly as possible in front of as many people as possible.  Hence, I referred to them as girls....

Then I read the AJC's review of the movie.  They gave the film an 'F'.  This has led to a couple of conclusions:

• M. Knight Shyamalan will always receive an unfair negative bias because so many 'critics and experts' expect the genius that was 'The Sixth Sense'.


• Hollywood is still not ready for anything that more than slightly deviates from pop culture norm.

And what makes a critic a critic?  At what point is a person uniquely qualified to praise or trash the work of another?  What must a person do to be considered worthy of having their opinion be a determinating factor in the success of an album or film?  Exactly when do your tastes become the mark by which the rest of the world should measure their tastes?

I find that most times critics say something is horrible, I enjoy it.  Does this mean I have horrible tastes?  Perhaps I'm just a simple minded guy that is easily entertained.  Alas, perhaps not.  Is there a B.S. for Criticism?  Better yet, on the AJC review there was a poll concerning 'Lady in the Water'.  At the time of this writing, the score was 533 to 549 as far as 'Go See It' vs 'Don't  Bother', relatively.  Seems to me like critics criticize to justify themselves.....sad really.....

Does this post make me a critic?