I've been getting a lot of criticism recently criticising my critiques of film critics. The most common complaints are that I'm complaining too much, and that I should be less "whiny." I find this taboo interesting. There's an unwritten rule that the gentlemanly thing to do is to take any and all critical punches, however below the belt, without so much as a murmur. But I don't think it's "whiny" to publicly disagree with something a film critic says. I think it's communicative, and moreover, I think it's the right thing to do. Keeping silent in the face of misperception helps no one.
My film is a full frontal assault on the taboo against sexual honesty. That a reviewer as intelligent as Anthony Lane would misconstrue that sexual honesty as "boastfulness" merely shows the chasm between my film and the well-worn grooves of contemporary cinema to which Mr. Lane has become so accustomed as to not be able to see anything outside of its ontological purview.
Another complaint is that I'm criticizing critics who have been essentially positive in their reviews, and that this is counter-productive. But I'm not criticizing film critics because they are criticizing my film. I criticize my own film all the time. I'm criticizing film critics because I think they're not getting it at the most fundamental level, and I'm trying to help set the record straight. In short, I'm trying to have a conversation.
There is no dividing line between filmmaking and life. One doesn't just make a film and then put it out into the world. Every step along the way involves moral and esthetic decisions, and every thing one does (or does not do) is an act of communication. So why not speak out? It's a lot more fun than staying silent.
posted by Caveh Zahedi at
5:39 PM
