what would happen if critics simply stopped reviewing bad movies?
Serious publications respected for their book reviews — The New York Times (h/t bronxbee); The New Yorker — have been of late seriously reconsidering the purpose of negative book reviews. No one has laughed at them, as far as I’m aware. Isaac Fitzgerald, the new books editor at Buzzfeed, has said flat out that he won’t publish negative reviews at all (Poynter).
I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before someone suggests that perhaps one way for critics and movie publications to cope with the tsunami of movies is simply to not spend time writing reviews of the bad ones.
What would happen if critics simply stopped reviewing bad movies?
I know some readers would be sad, because lots of film fans love a good smackdown of a bad movie. But what impact could such a movie have on the industry, and on readers on the whole? Would it make a bit of difference? Though there’s solid evidence that movies that get good reviews do better at the box office than those that get bad reviews (Collider), we still see bad movies cleaning up at the box office all the time.
What do you think?
(If you have a suggestion for a Question, feel free to email me.)