Skip to content

Movie Critics Shouldn't Be Popular – Scott Menzel

Born and raised in New Jersey, Scott Menzel has been a life-long fan of all things entertainment. His love for film started at five years old and has only grown over the years. Scott started writing reviews in early 2002 and has been conducting interviews since 2010. He currently serves as the Editor-In-Chief of We Live Entertainment and the founder of the Hollywood Critics Association.


What’s The Difference Between Movie Critics And Internet Trolls? – Why I Stopped Watching Movies – Death Of The Movie Critic – Why Movies Matter – Why 99% Of Movies Today Are Garbage – Why Do We Love Bad Movies? –







Stuff we use:

LENS – Most people ask us what camera we use, no one ever asks about the lens which filmmakers always tell us is more important. This lens was a big investment for us and one we wish we could have made sooner. Started using this lens at the end of 2013 –


Rode VideoMic Pro – The Rode mic helps us capture our backup audio. It also helps us sync up our audio in post

Audio Recorder – If we had to do it all over again, this is probably the first item we would have bought –

LIGHTS – Although we like to use as much natural light as we can, we often enhance the lighting with this small portable light. We have two of them and they have saved us a number of times –

COMPUTER – Our favorite computer, we each have one and have used various models since 2010 –

EDITING – We upgraded our editing suite this year and we’re glad we did! This has improved our workflow and the quality of our work. Having new software also helps when we have a problem, it’s easy to search and find a solution –

*These are affiliate links, by using them you can help support this channel.

#movies #entertainment #film


25 thoughts on “Movie Critics Shouldn't Be Popular – Scott Menzel”

  1. I believe the biggest issue surrounding film criticism nowadays is both the bad wrap people get for genuinely critiquing a film but also the many people who crap on a film because of their bias towards a certain filmmaker or actor. If you're going to critique a film based on the merit of the film itself, that's what it should be but don't completely dump on a film just because you don't like the person or people who made it. I look at someone like Roger Ebert who just critiqued a film based on the merit of the film itself, not because he didn't like the people behind it. In addition, I don't think you'll always be RIGHT as a film critic because you're just giving YOUR perspective on the film, not saying whether it's objectively good or not. I respect the critics who you can tell aren't afraid to give their opinion, and those people usually end up not being highlighted enough because they're too real for the snowflake industry full of shills who get paid to praise a film they probably didn't like at all.

  2. I disagree with him, at least somewhat. No one should be exempt from criticism just because they took too many licks from movie reviewers. If they want less bad reviews, then those writers and directors need to make better films.

    Also if a trailer looks bad and doesn't grab me, I'm not going to waste money seeing the film on day one just because it might be good. Marketing has no excuse when it comes to trailers because they spend so much money in marketing. If the trailer and doesn't grab the potential viewer, then that's on whoever was responsible for the trailer.

  3. I'm prejudiced. Take Anton Ego, a fictional restaurant critic from Pixar's "Ratatouille." I look for the critic's own movie or whatever is being critically reviewed.

    The basic question is "did you enjoy the movie?" After that, it might be nice to know "what did you like?"

  4. I was a security guard at a major Southern California newspaper for about a year during the early 1990's. The critics that reviewed movies and books were kind enough to tell me that they didn't have time to watch movies or read books and so they had to write their reviews on entertainment that they didn't experience. They used "sources" who had seen the movie or read the book–or they'd refer back to other works by that artist and the critics would come up with something creative.

  5. most movie reviewers are the scum of the industry. And the stupid ones who don't watch movies to make their own judgements are a key part of this problem. they just enable these idiots to assume they're some kind of end-all say in what people should and shouldn't watch. People need to make up their own mind.

  6. A Tale of Two Critics: We had a theatre critic in Toronto who died far too young. There was a memorial service for him in a hall that held… 1200, maybe more. It was packed and everyone who was anyone in theatre was there. Jon Kaplan loved theatre and his reviews showed it, even the tough ones. His opinions were respected because they were intelligent, discerning, and they didn’t come from a nasty place. There was another critic (who shall remain nameless but every Toronto fan will know who I mean) whose unfavourable reviews usually had the subtext “how darest thou subjecteth me to this dung.” It’s OK to say you hate something if you genuinely hate it and if you can back it up but it’s not OK to launch a personal attack on an artist’s worth. There won’t be an industry memorial in her honour when the time comes.

  7. This is why I like Jeremy Jahns reviews. If somethings bad, he tells it like it is. If it's good, he endorses it.
    Too many bought and sold critics these days love everything even if it's bad.

  8. Did I just hear him say he loved Jim Carey in Ace Ventura and Dumb and Dumber but hated Jonah Hill in Superbad? I am the exact opposite, I hated Jim Careys type of humor after he left In Living Color, and only started liking his movies around the time of the Truman Show. Jonah Hill is great in every comedy he has been in, I just didn't like his movies he acted in that wasn't comedies. The problem is, what the guy said in the first few minutes of this video, the guy says white boy falls upwards and the problem is, the critics, including this guy, thinks he has the power of the pen to write these directors and comedians out of the industry through criticism, and that is why there is such a difference in scoring/reviews from critics and normal people. THis is why I ignore all criticism from the people that are supposed to be professional critics. They think they have the power, when the power comes from the nepotism in the industry. The "white people" this guys talking about aren't white. They are actually Jewish.

  9. Why do you think there is such a large difference between the public and critic consensus? Take complete stinkers like Rings of Power or She-hulk on RT or Meta. The public scores has got it right, but only politically motivated moronic critics or ones that are bought and paid for, could ever give those shit shows the high marks that they have. As a whole you can't trust critics, must be the conclusion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *