The TV Addict 

Whenever a film (like this one) gets universally demolished by critics, there are inevitably people who rise up to defend it. That’s more than fine since moviegoing (and taste) is a subjective thing, and what isn’t one person’s cup of tea, is another’s veritable feast of splendor (though I’d have to question someone who can become fully nourished on films like the above).

The thing that drives me nuts though is when people defend movies that are perceived as crap by the majority of others by either eliciting either the “Not everything can be CITIZEN KANE” defense, or the slight variant of “It’s not supposed to be THE GODFATHER, it’s supposed to be a silly fun movie.” If you’re actually a critic (or perceived as one anyway) then often you’ll also find yourself on the end of a snarky attack accusing you of being too cynical and jaded, and incapable of simply enjoying movies for trying to be “fun.” Heck, I don’t even consider myself a critic yet, but rather someone who runs a site that – in its current infancy stage – is still a passionate hobby of sorts (with nonetheless greater aspirations), and even I’ve been accused of this now and then.

I can understand somewhat where such knee-jerk defenses come from. After all, given how personal one’s taste in films can be, it’s not nice to hear everybody hates something you might have enjoyed. That doesn’t excuse lazy arguing though and personal attacks. You feel a film isn’t being given its due? Then make your case and back it up. Don’t resort to such childish accusations of “You don’t know how to have fun,” which really is little more than the argumentative equivalent of kicking someone in the shin and running away. Nor should you resort to such lazy defenses as the ones mentioned above.

I say this all with personal emphasis, because I’ve been in my fair share of situations where I found myself defending movies that others hated, but I thought were fun. The thing is, when making your argument in defense of films largely considered to be dumb, yes taste is subjective, but you need to have a little perspective and humility. I’m fully down with enjoying a film that aspires to be nothing more than silly fun and achieves it (like THE SCORPION KING, for example), but if pressed to defend, be a little realistic. In other words, if you’re dealing with a film like THE MUMMY: TOMB OF THE DRAGON EMPEROR where there’s actually a scene where not only somebody gets vomited on by a Yak, but then also says “The Yak yaked,” be aware that there’s maybe something wrong.

Because in the end, as my good friend Miles Baker of MONDOmagazine pointed out, if a movie isn’t good at what it’s trying to do, then it’s not good. If you think it does succeed, or is still fun in spite of its failures, then back that up. In other words, instead of saying “It’s not APOCALYPSE NOW after all, lighten up you cantankerous fun-hating cynical Grinch!” maybe settle for “Yeah, maybe it’s not the greatest film in the world, but I enjoyed it for what it was.”

That’s a pretty safe way of avoiding coming off as a whiney baby, and actually getting your opinion understood (if maybe not entirely respected).