CriticGate and MovieTok’s Conflict of Interest

CREATOR NEWSLETTER


In an infamous AMC ad, Nicole Kidman wore a glorious sparkly pinstripe jumpsuit and made a good point: When watching movies, all of society comes together—and we are not just entertained, but transformed. Kidman, of course, was paid to say this. While we can appreciate the sincerity of her delivery, we can’t learn much from Kidman about the pros and cons of seeing a movie at an AMC theater. We’re not going to hear her notes on the obscene amount of popcorn on the floor, the screaming kids sitting behind us, the overpriced super-sized beverages

Now, you might think that I’m a bit pretentious for being so negative about these aspects of the movie-going experience. But some viral discourse this week has all of us movie nerds questioning our definition of film snobbery.

A viral New York Times article has pitted the stereotypical old-school, elitist film critics against the free-wheeling, personality-driven MovieTok creators who despise such negativity. The group of MovieTokers in the Times article, apparently, loathe to see themselves as anything like the critics of days past. As one 31-year-old TikToker said, “They watch movies and are just looking for something to critique,” while “fans watch movies looking for entertainment.”

The article would lead you to believe that the latter group of anti-critical TikTokers, for example, care more about getting invited to scab in cute pink dresses at the Barbie premiere, while the first group of anti-social critics would prefer to wear all black with clenched fists and red faces, trying to find the right buzzwords to critique the film’s sociopolitical undertone.

Both sound like a good time tbh. But both are extreme stereotypes. The Times insinuates most fans aren’t critics, and most critics aren’t fans. But as contributor Lon Harris writes this week, the lines are getting more and more blurred by the day. Some critics might identify as fans. Some movie reviewers might identify as critics. Some movie reactors might identify as all of the above. Some creators refuse to take brand deals to preserve their audience’s trust, others prefer to simply be transparent and disclose when an ad deal might be standing in the way of an honest review. 

But all of these movie-goers bring the art form of filmmaking alive. They all make the dazzling images on the silver screen possible. As Nicole Kidman said in her pinstripe suit, “Somehow, heartbreak feels good in a place like this.”

However, the Times article does make a good distinction: An “ad hoc code of ethics” for disclosing brand partnerships cannot replace the ironclad separation between reporter and subject that we’ve come to expect from professional journalists and critics. (Believe it or not, I actually have no hand in securing our newsletter’s sponsorships).

The survival of journalism is in a very precarious situation right now, Harris further noted in his column. It’s important to remember why critics became a thing in the first place, and why we want to keep the art of journalism alive and well.


NOTED BY LON HARRIS

Is MovieTok Replacing Film Criticism? No, No It’s Not

movietok

SPONSORED

Sculpt your unique sound and stand out from the crowd


THE COMMENTS SECTION


IN THE BIZ


LONG OVERDUE

Illinois Passed a Game-Changing ‘Kidfluencer’ Law. Here’s What You Need To Know.

A new law passed in Illinois gives young content creators protection from family exploitation.

By Franklin Graves, Passionfruit Contributor

kid influencers

ANOTHER AI DEBATE

scooby doo stop motion animation by eagan tilghman

A Fan Wanted To Make a Scooby-Doo Cartoon, But Ended Up Sparking an AI Debate

The 23-year-old just wanted to make a fun cartoon but ended up being the center of a debate: Is it ever acceptable to use AI voice actors?

By Steven Asarch, Passionfruit Contributor


YOUTUBE MADE ME DO IT

Content for Creators.

News, tips, and tricks delivered to your inbox twice a week.

Newsletter Signup

Latest Newsletters

  • Fake News: Influencers Didn’t Kill Journalism. Wall Street Did. 

    Fake News: Influencers Didn’t Kill Journalism. Wall Street Did. 

    CREATOR NEWSLETTER Issue #208 | February 1, 2024 Two weeks ago, the 30-year-old music news and review site Pitchfork was folded unceremoniously into GQ, gutting its staff. Conde Nast, the parent company of GQ, which acquired the venerated music site in 2015 — had its chief content officer Anna Wintour announce the layoffs during a…

  • Even the Top 4% of Creators Want a Union

    Even the Top 4% of Creators Want a Union

    CREATOR NEWSLETTER Issue #207 | January 30, 2024 Tomorrow morning, creator commerce platform Kajabi is releasing a new study examining 2,000+ high-earning creators across the world who make over $100,000 per year. The study covers some of the various “strategies, behaviors, mindsets, and demographics” that set six-figure-earning creators apart from the rest of the crowd.…

  • Do We Need a Reverse Adpocalypse?

    Do We Need a Reverse Adpocalypse?

    CREATOR NEWSLETTER Issue #206 | January 25, 2024 Deja-tube: no, it’s not the weird feeling one gets while watching Doja Cat’s “Demons” video. It’s the uncanny sensation after seeing a YouTube ad in clear, flagrant defiance of the platform’s policies show up on one channel and suddenly seeing it everywhere.  Whether it’s fleshlights, celebrity AI-generated…