The Perfect Movie Review?

[Anderton]

So it's the weekend. I like to see movies. Rogue One was cool, but I didn't want to see it again. So I went to Rotten Tomatoes to see what was playing.

 

 

There's another XxX (or is it xXx) movie with Vin Diesel. Uh...well...so I looked at some reviews, and found this one.

 

Should music gear reviews be written in the same style? I'm starting to think the answer might be "yes.

[AlamoJoe]

Well...You're a review Pro. Probably one of the most astute, knowledgeable ones about music related equipment and software for same to trod terra firma.

 

But I think reviewing music gear and reviewing movies are two different animals entirely. A movie, or a piece of music, or a book, generally are all strictly interpretations of same by said reviewer.

 

Reviewing gear, you are relating to the reader whether or not the gear does what it claims it can do. After that has been proofed, then it is a matter of how well the gear does what it does. Then praise, derision, or comparison to similar gear by other manufacturers. That's kind of how I see that.

 

Movies, Books, Music....these things all are strictly the opinion of the reviewer. I think generally that the opinions of the reviewers are just that. their opinions. A movie, book or CD could get the highest praise from reviewers, and tank in terms of sales. That speaks to it's appeal or lack of, but not necessarily to it's real quality or value, artistically. Or it could mean the reviewer was talking out his posterior and it really stank, and reviewer is simply using a metric important only to him/her.

 

I would think that reviewing a piece of gear or software would be quite a bit harder for an honest and earnest reviewer. You're talking about very real things. Things people use to create with. A stompbox that sounds absolutely great but is in a housing too frail to withstand the serious, brutal stomps of an eager rocker, is something that must be spoken to. As well as a stompbox a M1 Abrams tank could roll over without damage...but sounds like a distressed kitty when you put the juice to it.

 

With gear...You're talking about things that people will use over and over again. Things that people spend real money on. Reviews on gear matter. 'Cuz you're spending serious money. You go to a bad movie that got great reviews.."Aw, shucks, that bit it...Let's go grab a few beers and a pizza".Hey maybe $10 down the drain. Bum CD, about the same..Put on a different one. Crappy book that some critic in New York thought was the most important book since "The Illiad and The Odyssey", take it to the second hand bookstore and sell it and buy something else.

 

Drop several hundred bucks on a piece of software you've been assured by a trusted source will make marked improvements to your music, Software that is non-refundable...Well...That kind of stuff makes you angry. A rack unit that is so full of bugs you want to call an exterminator, well, that perturbs you a bit.

 

Gear reviewers are a much different, classier, subjective breed than Movie, Music, and Literary reviewers...By and Large.

 

Certainly in this community...We few...We Happy few.

 

[Ernest Buckley]

I agree with AlamoJoe on this one... and just for the record, I have never seen any Vin Diesel movies... isn`t that amazing in and of itself? I don`t like the characters he portrays and the fast car/fast women story lines get old fast and bore me to tears.

 

Anyway... I used to write for a local magazine. It was my job to review live music. This was back in the late 90s when my wife still had the energy to go out on a Thursday or Friday after a long day at work and hear some music. I never knew what I was getting myself into so we would go to a bar/music venue, grab a beer and sit back. Sometimes the music was really amazing, sometimes it was awful. But this was all my personal opinion and it sort of bothered me at times because I knew the songwriter spent time on their craft but the song just didn`t cut it... again, its all my own personal opinions but I would go off mercilessly. The readers loved it. I was being honest. If it sucked, I told the reader that I thought it sucked.

 

One time the performer read my review and was so upset they emailed me telling me I was wrong... I had no comeback... she was right. I was wrong... I was giving my own personal opinion about something she wrote that I thought was garbage. Eventually one of the music venues contacted me asking me if I would be interested in booking talent for them. The job paid quite nicely considering all I had to do was find a band or artist, book them, and tell the venue. It was all done via email and a phone call. I eventually stopped writing reviews about performers and writers... it just seemed wrong.

 

So... movie reviewers sort of fall into the same category for me unless the reviewer has the same sensibilities that I have but who knows for sure... its a crap shoot.

 

Gear on the other hand... is a different animal. Its more scientific. You can measure it, you can clearly measure whether it helps or hinders what you`re doing. However, there are elements of a gear review that are hard to measure... how does one measure quality? How does one grade on a scale of 1 to 10 how impactful a piece of gear will be for all users? It can`t be done. All reviews have their limitations but when it comes to gear, we now have easy access to video and audio, thanks to the internet so I think gear reviewers should use that method of communication more. The printed review is archaic. Just my $.02

[Anderton]

It's not so much that I think reviews should be more subjective, but my goal with a review has always been to express the "gestalt" of the gear. For example with the great-sounding stomp box that breaks if you even look at compared to the one that sounds horrible but is built like a tank, that expresses something that allows a person to make an informed decision. If they play only in the studio, then the fragility doesn't matter. If they've gone through 20 broken stompboxes, maybe the one that's built like a tank is the ticket.

 

The thing I liked about the movie review was I felt the reviewer really captured what the movie was about (disclaimer: I haven't seen it, so maybe he's way off base...but he sounds like he knows what he's talking about). Someone might read the review and go "Wow, sounds like it sucks, I'd rather watch paint dry" while someone else might read it and think "perfect...stupid fun would work for me tonight." I really don't remember the reviewer saying he did or didn't like it.

 

I don't agree that print is irrelevant for reviews because I think reviews are more about a filtering process than an evaluation one. Most software has demos, so what people really need to know isn't what I think about the software, but whether it's worth their time to download it, give up an email address, and put some time into learning it. Hardware is a little tougher, but a review can help people decide whether it's actually worth going to a GC to see what you think of a piece of gear.

 

I really don't put much credibility in a lot of, for example, YouTube reviews. A lot of them are just plain inaccurate, while others don't tell you what (at least I think) you need to know. When I did a Pro Review of the Helix, sure...I could have called up a preset and played some cool-sounding licks. Instead I choose to play the "naked" amp sounds, and play the same thing for each amp so you could compare them. Did it make the Helix sound exciting and cool? Probably not. Did it reveal what the amps sounded like under worst-case condition? Yes, and showed that they indeed sounded pretty darn good.

[philboking]

Unlike gear reviews, movie reviews are heavily dependent on payola. In fact I have found a very close inverse correlation between rave movie reviews and the entertainment value of the movie. The more flattering and more numerous the reviews, the worse the movie.

 

This works because movies are a consumable; nobody is likely to contact the attorney general's fraud department just because they got suckered into going to a bad movie.

[Ernest Buckley]

It's not so much that I think reviews should be more subjective, but my goal with a review has always been to express the "gestalt" of the gear. For example with the great-sounding stomp box that breaks if you even look at compared to the one that sounds horrible but is built like a tank, that expresses something that allows a person to make an informed decision. If they play only in the studio, then the fragility doesn't matter. If they've gone through 20 broken stompboxes, maybe the one that's built like a tank is the ticket.

 

The thing I liked about the movie review was I felt the reviewer really captured what the movie was about (disclaimer: I haven't seen it, so maybe he's way off base...but he sounds like he knows what he's talking about). Someone might read the review and go "Wow, sounds like it sucks, I'd rather watch paint dry" while someone else might read it and think "perfect...stupid fun would work for me tonight." I really don't remember the reviewer saying he did or didn't like it.

 

I don't agree that print is irrelevant for reviews because I think reviews are more about a filtering process than an evaluation one. Most software has demos, so what people really need to know isn't what I think about the software, but whether it's worth their time to download it, give up an email address, and put some time into learning it. Hardware is a little tougher, but a review can help people decide whether it's actually worth going to a GC to see what you think of a piece of gear.

 

I really don't put much credibility in a lot of, for example, YouTube reviews. A lot of them are just plain inaccurate, while others don't tell you what (at least I think) you need to know. When I did a Pro Review of the Helix, sure...I could have called up a preset and played some cool-sounding licks. Instead I choose to play the "naked" amp sounds, and play the same thing for each amp so you could compare them. Did it make the Helix sound exciting and cool? Probably not. Did it reveal what the amps sounded like under worst-case condition? Yes, and showed that they indeed sounded pretty darn good.

 

I think video reviews are the future for audio gear. How can it be a bad thing? As long as the reviewer is informed and can make their way around the gear, then whats not to gain? I`m thinking of some guitar pedal videos I was watching on YT just last week... the user had 5 pedals that he was comparing. No talking, just plug in and play. Let the viewer decide what they like.

 

Guitar reviews can go the same route but one cannot decide if a guitar is right for them from just a video. Guitars require a kinetic connection that cannot be achieved with any sort of review but I think comparing the sounds of guitars via video is far more insightful than a text review for sure. Same goes for hardware compressors and EQs.

 

Plug in video reviews are far more insightful than simply reading about it as well. Not really sure how text reviews can hold a candle to video reviews.