Film reviews can entertain, convince, notify, evaluate, criticise, publicise, misuse and save money; and inform people. Any number of these principles can be carried out in any review, and it is frequently decided by the magazine and their intentional audience as to the how and to what degree that these purposes are accomplished. Reviews operate as a middle man involving the (un-)seen film and the audience, and can therefore hold some influence over a variety of things, such as:
• The gross revenue of a film. While there are a numerous claims that mass-marketing of certain films can quash any review's impact, the failure of a film for example Alexander (which had particularly ruthless reviews) begs to differ. Nonetheless, there is in addition support for this argument, as was the case for all the later Scary Movie films; and the Disaster/Epic/DateMovie series. Despite this, they emerge to have a significant impact on independent films, and the astonishing success of some such as Pulp Fiction was believed to be to a certain extent the consequence of exceptionally complimentary reviews. Occasionally, film companies will not screen a film for reviewers in apprehension of getting very poor ones, as was the case for The Avengers. This doesn't always turn out well, as this approach is far too widespread nowadays and reviewers persuade audiences to be cynical about such films.
• Advertising for the film. As well as an advertisement for films within itself (anyone can fail to spot all the convention adverts from time to time, after all), many critically commended films 'spam' review ratings on their film posters and film companies rarely present press kits and gifts to critics in hopes of getting more positive reviews. Independent films are also undersupplied in the large marketing budget, and reviews inform audiences about the film for free; working in their favour.
• Anticipated earnings. Still major box analysis sites such as Box Office Prophets feature reviews in their estimates.
• Audiences who seek to make an improved judgement on whether to view a film or not. Finally, it’s the consumer who has the money and they don't always have it to throw away, so any good signs of a film, for instance a review, assist them decide on a film that they would enjoy.
The audiences for reviews contrast as they are largely reliant on the magazine itself and its own, intended target audience. For instance, a film like “Harry Potter” would be reviewed as a children's story in a children's magazine, supporting it largely on appearances and how 'desirable' it may be, whereas any adult magazine or newspaper (be it The Guardian, TotalFilm, or Sight & Sound) would see it as a story about childhood, focusing on what's below the surface and how it tries to explore this theme.
‘TotalFilm’ and ‘Empire’ provide for mainstream film audiences who are initially desire to be entertained. Whereas, there is to an extent of criticism concerned, it is not the foremost focal point of the majority of articles; more the plot and characters. It is also more visually satisfying, with numerous graphics, images and colour that grab hold of your sight easily, plus a rating for films. Audiences are just expected to know the main stars of Hollywood, and perhaps other, parallel mainstream films (e.g. in TotalFilm's "See this if you liked..." section).
On the other hand then there are magazines produced by cinemas, for example, ‘Prevue’ by Vue cinema, who pass out a brochure style layout to be read quickly (also means its cheaper to produce), includes a huge picture of lots of smaller ones, no rating, and simply a plot/character summarisation that is entirely positive, as the institutional repercussions (i.e. ticket sales) warrant it.
No comments:
Post a Comment