"All you really need to know about The Oscars is that they're the awards that didn't give a Best Picture gong to Citizen Kane, but did give one to Driving Miss Daisy. Just think about that for a moment and try to imagine a world in which Driving Miss Daisy really was the best film you were going to see all year. Be honest. You'd throw yourself off a bridge, wouldn't you?"
As I said when I reviewed his last book, It's Only A Movie, I rarely disagree with Mark Kermode when it comes to cinema. Films, yes, occasionally we quibble over individual movies. Even then, I can usually see his point (even if I disagree). But when it comes to his thoughts on cinema itself, Mark Kermode is my soul brother.
I don't think critics should do the job of watching movies for you. I don't even think they should do the job of telling you which movies to watch. Or what you should think about them. No, I think critics should do the job of watching all the movies and then telling you what they think in a way which is honest, engaging, erudite and (if you're lucky) entertaining.
Beyond that, you're on your own.
His latest book tackles just What's Wrong With Modern Cinema. And I nodded my head so much, Louise thought I'd developed a twitch.
From major problems with the movie-going experience itself (the frustrations of online ticket buying, badly framed films and why popcorn is wrong) to the way Hollywood is screwing up and dumbing down the end product (like me, Kermode has a serious loathing of 3D - though he does point out that the Nazis were big fans) to the thorny question of "What are film critics for anyway?", this book is always entertaining, often hilarious and occasionally infuriating. I shared his frustration and pain - particularly when he was arguing with a pompous cinema "manager" who obviously had little interest in how films were projected onto the screen. Together, we mourned the death of the professional projectionist and looked back fondly on a world where ushers did more than just tear your ticket stub. And when he compares the modern cinema going experience to Westworld minus Yul Brynner... well, I had to shudder.
In the wake of Avatar's bum-numbing stereoscopic success, every half-witted Hollywood producer without an original thought in their coke-addled heads decided that 3D was a cash cow and all future products must be forced to conform to this glutinous economic paradigm forthwith. Never mind the fact that (James) Cameron had spent years gazing at his own navel trying to figure out how to make a game-changing movie in a medium which no one had liked for almost a century. Say what you like about Avatar (that it's infantile, overlong, shamelessly derivative, wildly patronising, and laughably lacking in humour from start to finish - which it is), at least its creator believed in the technological innovations apparently required to bring it to the screen. Never mind that the film looks a million times better in 2D (clearer, sharper, brighter) or that Pandora is a far more immersive world when not viewed through the alienating annoyance of polarised lenses that make everything seem dark, dingy and dismally diminutive. At least Cameron thought he was doing the right thing - like Tony Blair deciding to invade Iraq, only with less tragic results.
