Tweet
So Movie Reviewers are nothing new. Been around since longer than I have been alive. A movie comes out they watch it and then tell everyone what they think.
What is new...newish rather is movie reviewers going back and reviewing films from an earlier time period. This can introduce some interesting moments where they call out antiquated ideas and lend a different perspective to a movie that's mired in it's time period. I appreciate that part of it.
There is a thing I have noticed though about reviews that say things like
"There is no way kids would be allowed to be missing for that long" (stranger things review in reference to the fact kids leave their homes in the morning and don't return until night)
That review in question is made by a 20 year old who spent most of their childhood in a time when cell phones were a thing. When video games sent more kids playing inside and playdates were something a lot of kids did.
Stranger Things is however set during a time period when myself and many of my peers did leave home on our bikes in the morning and not return until dinner. It wasn't unusual as keeping constant tabs on us would have meant our parents dedicating all of their own time to being in one spot like the house and not leaving until we were done having fun.
It wasn't like they could track our phones or call us and say "hey come home"
Not what this is about. What I am saying is that often reviewers will say things like this or "why didn't they use the story from the video game" ignoring that the story they are thinking of didn't exist until after the movie came out and that prior to the movie the story was no more developed than the Fix it Felix Jr. Game.
So that's what this is about. If you're going to review something either as a period piece or something from an earlier time period do you feel that it's the reviewers responsibility to take the things they think "don't make sense" and see if they actually do make sense for that time?
What is new...newish rather is movie reviewers going back and reviewing films from an earlier time period. This can introduce some interesting moments where they call out antiquated ideas and lend a different perspective to a movie that's mired in it's time period. I appreciate that part of it.
There is a thing I have noticed though about reviews that say things like
"There is no way kids would be allowed to be missing for that long" (stranger things review in reference to the fact kids leave their homes in the morning and don't return until night)
That review in question is made by a 20 year old who spent most of their childhood in a time when cell phones were a thing. When video games sent more kids playing inside and playdates were something a lot of kids did.
Stranger Things is however set during a time period when myself and many of my peers did leave home on our bikes in the morning and not return until dinner. It wasn't unusual as keeping constant tabs on us would have meant our parents dedicating all of their own time to being in one spot like the house and not leaving until we were done having fun.
It wasn't like they could track our phones or call us and say "hey come home"
Not what this is about. What I am saying is that often reviewers will say things like this or "why didn't they use the story from the video game" ignoring that the story they are thinking of didn't exist until after the movie came out and that prior to the movie the story was no more developed than the Fix it Felix Jr. Game.
So that's what this is about. If you're going to review something either as a period piece or something from an earlier time period do you feel that it's the reviewers responsibility to take the things they think "don't make sense" and see if they actually do make sense for that time?
Comment