May
4
Real Guys: Why We Need Film Critics
The latest YouTube film critics, Real Guys, make Reel Geezers look like geniuses. Pugnacious ex-gossip columnist A.J. Benza, who can't be bothered to remember the name of Daniel Day Lewis's co-star in There Will Be Blood, and his slightly more literate writing partner Neal Gumpel, say they are giving us the real truth about movies. They are giving us raw opinion with no insight. If this is the future, shoot me.
Here's Real Guys on There Will be Blood:
Here's Reel Geezers on Forgetting Sarah Marshall:
You tell me, who's better?
Subscribe to this blog's feed
Reel Geezers Trounce Real Guys on insight, intelligence, research(real guy Benza did not prepare at all!!!!), wit, & most important of all, made me look at the movie in a new way. Of course I had seen both movies so that slants it. But if I hadn't Real Guys would have been even more of a turn off. Somebody please stop them. They remind me of a conversation I overheard at a bar on Friday night. 3 guys walk into a bar talking movies & the talk turned to Michael Bay. One guy says the only Michael Bay movie that I don't like that much is Bad Boys 2. I ordered another vodka, drank it, went home & watched a DVD. ........"The Shining" if you must know, & it was a lot better than the last time I saw it which was opening weekend at the Chinese, but its no Bad Boys 1.
Posted by: Allan Arkush | May 04, 2008 at 12:06 PM
the democratizing effect of the internet may have made elitism in writing a thing of the past but it also, by definition, allows any schlub(s) with a connection (and a video cam) to post their opinions
there will be (lots) more shows like 'real guys'. think blogs, except with video
but, so what? there have always been poorly informed people with knee-jerk opinions. the only difference is, now, they have a forum -- the internet. now that high-end criticism is a lost art (or at least one for which there is little demand) every tom, dick, and harry will rush in to fill the void
sorry, at this juncture, 'real guys' does in fact appear to be the future of movie talk. please don't shoot yourself, though -- things may be different in a year or two. i see a light at the end of the tunnel
Posted by: Alan | May 04, 2008 at 12:29 PM
What people tend to forget about the old style film critics who so enthusiastically being given them bums rush these days is that they were professionals who took the job seriously and did their homework. We have only ourselves to blame.
Posted by: David C. | May 04, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Guys, this is a fabricated show. These aren't 2 guys who just picked up a camera. The logo at the beginning says: 60Frames.
Well... 60Frames is the new start-up from Brent Weinstein of UTA Online. This is about as organic as supermarket corn.
Posted by: Edward Wilson | May 04, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Jeez,
A friend called me and told me to check out this site. yes it's me the slightly more literate guy who sits alongside AJ. In our defense it's called REAL GUYS MOVIE REVIEW. One comment was "this sounds like something you'd hear in a bar"...YEP.
That's it. That's the idea. We are not 'critics' we are doing an honest review. I don't know the names of directors and actors. That's the idea. People who don't know and who don't give a crap. Our goal is to push movies we love and save REAL people the 20 bucks needed to sit through the crap we often have to see.
Most responses I've had from people in the industry is a good laugh and agreement overall with what we had to say.
thanks
Neal Gumpel
Posted by: Neal | May 04, 2008 at 01:14 PM
They both suck big time, but the Real Guys are the worst. Lame and useless.
Posted by: Paxton Hernandez | May 04, 2008 at 05:06 PM
But Neal it sounded as though you (not AJ) were trying to save us from watching crap like There Will Be Blood! (While I too had problems with the ending, the movie deserved its eight Oscar noms and one win.) If you're going to do this, it helps to be precise about what you want to say.
Posted by: Anne thompson | May 04, 2008 at 05:25 PM
I'm about as likely to ever take another look at the 'Real Guys' as I would have been to keep watching 'Ebert and Roeper' if Wilonsky would have continued being a guest host. They're as real as Paris Hilton would be working the drive through at a burger joint. For movie reviews that actually sound like they come from a bar (and have been on Chicago radio for over 20 years check out the below.
http://www.93xrt.com/pages/65486.php
Posted by: mitkid | May 04, 2008 at 06:09 PM
While I may not agree with all of their opinions I can appreciate them. They were right on with The Diving Bell and The Butterfly. They're making no claims at being experts and if there is a public venue such as the internet why not make use of it? The democratization of art may be scary to some people but at the same time no one is forcing you to listen. There's no reason expert opinion should be upheld at the expense of public opinion and vice versa.
Posted by: Hillary Evans | May 04, 2008 at 07:36 PM
Of course, "the kind of thing you'd hear at a bar" always depends on just what bar you go to. I'm from Carroll Gardens, and I hear more perceptive comments about film at Brooklyn Social, Abilene...and yes, at P.J. Hanley's.
Also, what, exactly, does the sentence "We are not 'critics' we are doing an honest review" mean? (Also, where did you lose the comma that should be in that sentence?) That critics by definition don't "do" honest reviews? We're all bought and paid for regardless of our opinions?
And Gumpel's the guy who's "slightly more literate" than A.J. Benza. Check. These are the kind of mooks who give mooks a bad name.
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | May 04, 2008 at 09:00 PM
Glenn,
thanks for the set up. Yes my commas are in the wrong place. I tend to screw that stuff up. I've sold my scripts to Jim Sheridan (did you) I also did rewrites for Garry Marshall (did you)... I worked on a script with Arthur Penn (did i spell that right Glenn?)
Yes... You're the reason I decided to do Real Guys Movie review. It's because assholes like you are all over the film world. My pronunciation isn't right. My spelling isn't right. But I have people on my speed dial who YOU will NEVER MEET who ask me what to do with story lines on upcoming 20 million dollar films. And YES i'm married to an X supermodel from the 80's. Enjoy your night pal
Neal Edward Gumpel
Posted by: Neal | May 04, 2008 at 09:31 PM
Some of us think the slope really started to get slippery with the advent of AICN. At least one seasoned observer digs back a lot further and blames a writer I still greatly admire. [http://www.paulschrader.org/articles/pdf/2006-FilmComment_Schrader.pdf]
Yeah, we know Hillary. Standards are eye-rollingly square. You can take comfort from the fact that there are hardly any left at this point anyway. Most of the good critics have already been fired.
Posted by: David C. | May 04, 2008 at 10:51 PM
I would much rather hear unbiased reviews from "amateur" critics like Neal and AJ who have no agenda than hear fawning reviews from "professional" critics whose priority is to get their name and unearned praise out there/used in ads for terrible movies.
As for Hillary Evans' attack on Neal and AJ for not having views as "perceptive" as the ones she overhears at her local bars, criticizing Neal for a missing comma (in a message board post!) and patronizingly calling Neal and AJ "mooks" -- that's just straight-up snobbery. Evans says she's "from Carroll Gardens" but I'm guessing she's actually from somewhere far from New York, and moved to Brooklyn so she could hang out in hipster bars with her indier-than-thou pals and mock other people who commit the Cardinal Sin of not thinking and being exactly like her.
To Ms. Evans and the people who don't like the show: don't watch it!
Posted by: Greg Greenberg | May 04, 2008 at 10:52 PM
Oops! My sincere apologies to Hillary Evans; the previous post should have been directed at Glenn Kenny. That's what I get for posting at 2 a.m...
Posted by: Greg Greenberg | May 04, 2008 at 10:56 PM
Wow. "Neal Edward" is kinda thin-skinned for someone who's racked up such a formidable CV.
I love guys like this, who automatically assume that any skepticism directed their way is the result of pure envy. No, Neal, I've never sold a script to Jim Sheridan. Never even tried to. I'm not a screenwriter, aspiring or otherwise. It's quite possible that I don't even want to meet any of the people you have on speed dial.
And yet, for all that...I still believe you're kind of not that bright, or perceptive, or worth listening to. Now tell me how much that bothers you. Tell me how much of an asshole I am for saying it. Because things are really so great for you. Then see if you can find the disconnect.
And Greg Greenberg—yeah, that IS what you get for posting at 2 a.m. I'm sure there are other benefits too.
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | May 05, 2008 at 05:48 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen, there's Glenn with more insight in an insult than all the Real Guys videos that I watched the timeline for to see when they'd be over. Newsflash: most people writing and making movies are not bright.
Greg, when people say what you did, I wonder who they're stuck reading or if they're bothering to read anyone at all, and did you even listen to Neal and AJ's reviews? I'm sorry Real Guys, it's not personal, but your reviews appeal to people who live under rocks. It's for people who haven't learned to crawl yet, it's an underfunded headstart progam for pre-crawlers. I agree with Anne, it's "raw opinion with no insight" and take it a step further, "for people who've never heard a lick about what you're reviewing." That's how obvious and superficial your reviews are.
And how typical that two real people can barely fill three plus minutes with interesting conversation about film, even accounting for going off subject with dick schtick and cut aways to slack-jawed eye rolling, no matter how funny the two of you look, so much so that I actually found myself paying more attention to the ads than to you guys after a while. Hey, that may be the point, it's for cavemen and adsters. Good luck with your endeavor.
Not all the good writers have been fired David, and not all good writers have the jobs. Greg, you're not beholden to whichever critics' motivations you suspect, it's no-money down at Metacritic and Rottentomatoes, where you can find muscularity in major print and a pastiche of longer stuff on the web with or without Google (until pay subscriptions to an advanced googlegatoreader service become available).
And yes, Marcia and Lorenzo are fascinating, even if the production isn't slick; bless their editor for not having too big an ego and pulling out the heavy duty effects tools box or making them loop stuff.
Posted by: T. Holly | May 05, 2008 at 08:51 AM
re: The Real Guys -- Granted, their banter isn't exactly the stuff of high discourse, but are their vacuous insights any less offensive or meaningless than "critics" such as Rex Reed, Roger Moore, or Luke Y. Thompson?
Oh, and what's an X model?
Posted by: Filmbrain | May 05, 2008 at 09:01 AM
No, these guys are worse, in the sense that they are not even trying to be smart or insightful. Trying and falling short is at least honorable. The Two Dipshits dismiss all of that as effete and elitist. They are presenting themselves as blockheads speaking frankly to other blockheads---successfully, it seems.
If The Violence Channel in the Mike Judge movie "Idiocracy" had a film review program, it would look and sound exactly like Real Guys.
Posted by: David C | May 05, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Love of movies and of good writing about movies is heartbreaking these days.
Nobody tries to make money on a purposefully vulgar website making fun of Monteverdi or Webern or Monk. And newspapers don't hire as serious music critics people who pride themselves on not being able to tell Wagner from Handel.
Really good movies are becoming commercially marginal, but not, I'm afraid, because critics are stupid.
Other way around, actually
Posted by: tulkinghorn | May 05, 2008 at 02:28 PM
My biggest problem with this is how condescending it is. It's a good idea to instinctively distrust anyone so desperately eager to call themselves a "real guy." Or who is inordinately proud of their bad spelling. (Bad spelling in itself isn't so bad -- Hemingway was a terrible speller. But holding it up as a badge of honor seems a bit too calculated.)
There's something to be said for a nakedly populist sort of film criticism. Plenty of people look for big, unambiguous movies with lots of explosions and tits, and there's nothing wrong with a critic trying to speak for that sort of audience. But that's not what this is.
These two are just opportunists, and their pitch (essentially, "I'm a thoughtless drunken idiot, just like YOU"), is indicative of nothing beyond the insultingly low regard in which they hold their potential audience. It's the poor white yokel version of a minstrel show -- I don't buy it for a second.
Posted by: Andrew | May 05, 2008 at 02:38 PM
Brent Weinstein, hook it up! These "real" guys (who have hosted TV shows and are married to ex-supermodels and have Jim Sheridan on speed dial... oh my!) are OLD and neither particularly funny or insightful. Plus AJ wears a pirate earring. Let me see... you want to appeal to a younger demographic who don't read reviews in newspapers, but then you go and hire a couple of washed-up stiffs? How does that make any sense? Who cares what a couple of guys in their 40's think of Sarah Marshall. Isn't that supposed to be courting a younger audience? Wouldn't that audience want to hear from someone its own age? Is this really the best UTA has to offer? I'm 24 and I've got more painful honesty than Abe Lincoln. Bring me in, sit me down, and I will run circles around these slightly younger Real Geezers. I'd just really like to hear your defense of financing this project with these two philistines. Neal, how in the world do you not recommend There Will Be Blood? Seriously, what is wrong with you? I mean, really. Tell me. And David C. you can take your slippery slope and shove it you know where. AICN has been doing great work for more than a decade so eat one.
Posted by: MiraJeffAICN | May 05, 2008 at 03:34 PM
Wow. Where HAS "Neal Edward" run off to, after his bold defenses? Maybe he's got some script-doctorin' to do. In any case, I have to say, having checked out the balance of the "Real Guys" movie reviews, I've revised my opinion. Damn. These fellas are funnier than "Yacht Rock," and they're NOT EVEN TRYING! A.J.'s "What do Asians know about movies more than Americans" bit during their review of "My Blueberry Nights" (a rather bad movie incidentally), is just...priceless.
Come on, Neal Edward. Stand tall. You thrice-married, twice to an X-model stud, you.
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | May 05, 2008 at 04:13 PM
Andrew...well, I guess I gotta get into the fray alongside my boy, Neal. I dont yet know where I'll end, but lemme just start with the fact that you know "Hemmingway was a bad speller," immediately makes you THE LAST type of person at which we are aiming these 90-second movie reviews. Jeez, a "poor, white version of a minstrel show" is a bit of a racist remark to toss into the debate isn't it? Don't you think there's any room for a couple of (O.K., I won't say 'Real,') regular guys who want to talk about the movie they just caught in an immediately honesy way? If in-depth bullshit is your cup of tea, then I would suggest you stick with a pro like Rex Reed. He seems more like your type of man anyway.
I'll just keep on thinking of all the regular guys I run into who want to know a thing or two about a movie. You know, guys who drive trucks, hammer nails, sell cars, fix drains, etc. And Neal and I will just keep on talking to them. No big deal. Don't get so worked up about it. Hit the gym or something. Go to the gun club. Anything but sit here and blog your little ass off.
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 05, 2008 at 04:52 PM
Wow, Mr. Benza, your fanfare to the common man is actually substantially less convincing than Hillary Clinton's. You must have more riding on this lame YouTube movie reviewing scheme than anybody had imagined. Suddenly I feel kind of sorry for you and your cute little buddy "Neal Edward." But if you keep it up, I'm gonna have to array a bunch of truck-driving, nail-hammering, car-selling guys to make fun of you. Might take me an hour or two.
Good lord, man, you're more deluded than I ever gave you credit for...
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | May 05, 2008 at 05:08 PM
Wow...the Carrol Gardens Kid himself! I'm from Bensonhurst. Ever heard of it?
All I have riding on the show is my well-deserved right to talk about what we all talk about - movies. Who gives a shit what language we use as we're doing it? As for the Hillary Clinton remark...keep the politics for another blog. This is about movies. Nothing fancy here. Just a couple guys talking about movies.
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 05, 2008 at 05:39 PM
I go out fishing today and I miss all this?
Oh, and thanks for thinking I'm 40 something..
Despite our low class uneducated white trash ways I still think we're right on with the reviews. I'm getting E mails from quite a few people telling me that I'm an idiot but we seem to be right on the reviews. That's the idea. Blueberry nights was the worst movie i've ever seen. Diving Bell was the best movie I've seen in two years. The Park Slope crowd will love what we have to say about Stop Loss this week.
And despite what you say YOU WILL check out what we have to say about upcoming films.
Just kidding. Trying a bit of mind control.
gotta run out and vote for Obama tomorrow down here in ole north carolina
Neal
Posted by: Neal | May 05, 2008 at 05:48 PM
You know what, A.J.? Well said. You and Neal do your thing, I'll do mine. Maybe we'll fight in the interstices, as here. But if I criticize you, understand I don't dispute your right to broadcast your opinions as you can, and see fit, just as I understand you don't dispute mine. In the meantime, we can talk shit about each other in our respective virtual houses, as well as Ms. Thompson's, as much as we see fit. Such is the glory of democracy and the internet and whatnot. Thus, I say to you, Salud, Skoal, and best of luck in your endeavors!
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | May 05, 2008 at 05:51 PM
what does interstices mean?
Posted by: neal | May 05, 2008 at 06:10 PM
Well said, Sir Kenny. I respect that you respect our right to talk all the shit we want about the movies we see.
That said...what does "interstices" mean?
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 05, 2008 at 06:13 PM
Literally, it means a small space between tissues or organs. In this context, I meant it to describe this venue as a space between what myself—in my reviewing work at Premiere.com and my blog there—and A.J. and Neal—in their Real Guys reviews—are primarily doing.
I THINK I used the word correctly, but I'm wiling to defer to some higher grammatical authority. Does George Will or somebody read this?
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | May 05, 2008 at 06:21 PM
You may have intended to last 90 seconds, but at three plus minutes, you better start nude wrestling if you expect people to come back, or steal some ideas from critics before you review your next film.
Posted by: T.Holly | May 05, 2008 at 06:29 PM
If we went over 90 seconds or whatever...that's not what we intended to do. We dont cut these together, don't forget. We're just the talking heads. But I agree...I get sick of my own voice after 20 seconds. But how long do you think it takes someone to read a written review? Maybe 10 minutes. So...at least we cut seven minutes off that time.
Anyhwow, Hillary...the point is not to talk like professional "critics." The idea here is to talk like most regular folks talk when they are discussing a picture they just saw. The reason we did this is because we're basically tired of listening or reading - what is mostly - a huge group of self-entitled, intellectual people "blogging" about movies. Our point is..it's just a movie - calm down. Some of you act like you're repairing the Sistine Chapel.
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 05, 2008 at 06:39 PM
Sorry..that was for T. Holly. NOT Hillary.
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 05, 2008 at 06:40 PM
Hillary must be feeling kind of persecuted right about now,having come to the Real Guys defense and then getting mistakenly slammed by both Greg Greenberg AND A.J.
Hey, A.J., if you're tired of listening to/reading the opinions of "self-entitled, intellectual" people—because being intellectual is so awful, after all—just stop doing it. I made myself a much happier person by weaning myself off the blogs of people I thought were idiots, or insane. You can do it too!
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | May 05, 2008 at 06:56 PM
And since you're reviewing old stuff anyway, these are rental decisions you're helping people with in your gut level "I liked/I didn’t like it" way. Go crazy and review a doc or a very challenging or small independent film.
Posted by: T.Holly | May 05, 2008 at 07:08 PM
Movies are a popular art form and a populist approach to talking about them isn't evil. I do wish you cared enough about them (and about performing a service for your audience) to get your facts straight. Even teenaged music fans know chapter and verse about their favorites. How hard can it be?
Posted by: David C. | May 06, 2008 at 07:38 AM
Hey T. Holly.....we are DYING to review a doc or a small indy. We just followed company protocol the first go 'round. But I promise there are a few Iraqi War docs we want to tackle. Stay with us...we will.
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 07, 2008 at 05:17 PM
Sir Kenny....I respect intellectuals. I just think they're wasting their precious time when it comes to defending someone else's opinion about a movie. After all...the way I see it...arguing over a movie is no different than arguing over an ice cream sundae. Everybody is right and everybody is wrong. It aint no big.
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 07, 2008 at 08:58 PM
This is for David C.
What "facts" are you speaking of that we apparently got wrong? As I see it...when it comes to simply reviewing a movie...the "facts" rarely get into the way of what we are trying to get across. The people we are speaking to DO NOT know or care about the fine arts of editing or sound mixing or cinematography. They just, plain and simple, want to know why they should or should not see the movie in question. And Neal and I leave them with no-frills opinions. Every ultra-qualified film critic I watch or read (and I respect them ALL) goes way too far and too long when it comes to their movie reviews. The real world...at least the folks we are looking to reach....couldnt give a rat's ass for a long, windy review. Our idea is to give it to them straight in an honest and timely fashion. Afterall...it's a freakin movie, for God's sake. It aint the result of their Cat Scan.
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 07, 2008 at 09:13 PM
How many phone calls did it take, A.J., to get Glen fired? A few bitching sessions up the ladder? Even the intertices are bugged? Without Glens's shit running on it's terms, your shit will never stand up. Glen made Premiere exist and it sucks for firing him, for whatever reason.
Posted by: T. Holly | May 09, 2008 at 09:47 AM
I wasn't being literal (until the shit part). Premiere is stupid is as stupid does. It's a no brainer for Glenn Kenny to have his own website, complete with video reviews and guest critics.
Posted by: T.Holly | May 09, 2008 at 12:24 PM
An excellent recent piece (printed on actual paper before being posted on the web) on many of the issues raised here:
http://ftl.nypress.com/21/17/news&columns/feature3.cfm
And A.J.---the names of the actors in movies aren't minor details. That you can't be bothered to remember them---or if you can't to write them down; if you CAN write---says less about what your viewers may or may not be interested in than about your pride in your own work, or lack thereof.
And, yes, Glenn should definately have an outlet. His stuff is always great fun to read. He's also a terrific boss at the assignment and copy-editing stages. But if he does have other people working for him, he should put somebody else in charge of making sure they get paid.
Posted by: David C | May 09, 2008 at 02:18 PM
Why is everyone addressing me about Glenn Kenny apparently getting fired? I have absolutely no idea what any of this means. Care to clue me in...
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 09, 2008 at 04:02 PM
I dont know what this Glenn Kenny thing is about. I'm not of the blog world. But I was enjoying our give and take. I'm gonna try and get ahold of him and talk to him.
Posted by: A.J. Benza | May 09, 2008 at 04:08 PM
People, lay off A.J. He didn't have, as they say, dick to do with my firing. Really, I thought this notion was a joke but it's getting some weird traction. As no less an authority as Anne herself can testify, the stuff that goes down at Hachette has a logic all its own. One that not even my new pal A.J. can bend.
Incidentally, in one of the interims, I looked at a bunch of the "Real Guys" YouTube bits. And I thought, "Whoa. These guys are as funny as 'Yacht Rock,' and they're not even trying." But then it hit me—they actually are aiming for funny. And they GET funny. And they should stick to that story, by the way.
In any case, God save us all, who care about movies.
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | May 09, 2008 at 07:28 PM
It's been a strange week---NY Times layoffs, Picturehouse and WIP going down, and you leaving--although I have all confidence that someone will snap you up. Call me.
Posted by: anne thompson | May 09, 2008 at 08:40 PM
The old couple is kind of cute, but anyway, who needs critics?! I've been working for a while on a similar concept but basically making fun of the whole situation. You can catch our shows' episodes (They're for Latin America and are in Spanish. Sorry) here: http://www.youtube.com/user/aleccacciola
Feedback is welcome!
Ale
Posted by: Alejandro Cacciola | June 07, 2008 at 09:08 AM