Editor's Note:

Reviewing Dan Franklin's Come My Fanatics has got us thinking this is a decent time to take a minute and reflect on current events and the future of Funeralopolis. What is it we're trying to say with this zine? What do we stand for? What do we want to achieve? Since, this zine is to continue for the foreseeable future, I thought it best to dedicate as much time as possible to the written word if that is to be the path taken. Over the course of reviewing so regularly and reading other reviews too, I have noticed what I would like to call, 'limitations' in the form that irritate me beyond belief. A shame because this whole thing should be freeing, especially for independents. That's my favourite thing about it right now, you don't need them million dollar budgets to pick up the pen.

Firstly, the majority of them out there serve to recommend or not recommend the most recent movies playing in theatres. I have next to no interest in promoting or not promoting a set of films currently released at the cinema. Such a process is only commercial -the antithesis of what this zine seeks to be. So, what you're talking about is not reviewing but analysing? Technically yes, but why can't it be both? Merely serving the purpose of recommending causes a review to play second fiddle to the movie in question, holding back the potential of what a review could do. A review should stand on its own and it should be possible to write a review that is better than the film included. The quality of the film should come second to the quality of the writing. To the point you trust a writer, so you read their work regardless of whether you're interested in the film. Ideally, the reader doesn't even look at the movies involved.

Second, in doing so there should be a sense of recurring themes in a writers work similar to auteur theory. They need to be hammering out a style every week and that is what the readers come for over the movies in question. If this could be done on Letterboxd, then I'd have stuck with that but the form here allows one to be more self-referential across multiple works. A zine is more contained. Whilst in this area, the writer should bring in styles and techniques from other mediums, be it poetry, painting, literature, comics or music. Whatever his interests be. I see no reason why the review can't develop in to its own proper art form and in time we can't eradicate this idea that critics are those that can't do. It needs to do what all art forms still arguably in their infancy do and borrow from other mediums until it cements itself fully. The possibilities are endless. Sure, we've had film criticism for a while now but we've not really had criticism of film criticism. In my eyes, there's still a lot more to come. Psychoanalysis in particular is still very underexplored as Bordwell has often pointed out and it should be our aim as critics to tap in to this.

Third, where I've found most critics slip up and let reviews down is in the application of their understanding of the text. They reveal this when they say throwaway meaningless comments like, "it has good cinematography". So no more of that, please. I'm not for one second saying you can no longer talk about cinematography but you cannot simply leave it there. Stating that something is aesthetically pleasing is not an argument in itself. You can't apply the same standards of measure to every single movie. Cause that's all these guys have is like a boring tick list without ever really engaging with a movie. I want to know why that works in the context of the film and its genre/style. Cause sometimes the uglier a movie the better. How else would you explain the brilliance of Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper?

Personally, I have focused on an individual style I'd like to develop further to address this side of criticism. My inspiration comes in a few layers and combinations. It should be of no surprise that the first layer begins with a love that actually lies outside of film with Hunter S. Thompson, Gonzo and new journalism. Perspective and immediacy being my fascination here. I'm not the first to bring Gonzo writing in to film criticism. Both Joe Bob Briggs and Bill Landis have already explored these avenues. The very reason they the greatest film critics of all time and transcend in to being artists. Other big names like Kermode, Kael, Ebert and Bazin I would classify as historians and essayists. Phenomenal writers as they are, they lack a distinctive style. Studying Briggs and Landis is the second layer. Where these guys reach the end of the road is in that their personalised accounts generally focus on the spectacle of film watching and deviations from that only turn to general lawlessness, anti-authority and sleaze like the themes present in the genres of the movies they review and the attitudes of those who watch the movies too. Whereas, I think we need to tackle every film reviewed at an individual level.

Having studied the previous generations of journalists and critics then, my own contribution on top of that is inspired by the way I was brought up hearing my grandfather, a keen western appreciator, discussing movies. He will take the basic themes of a movie and then proceed to give a personal story based on those provided. Like all older folk who have spent countless hours in the boozer, the guys a master storyteller. Sadly, this is a dying art.

I think what the next step of film criticism should be is testing out our own understanding of the text, dislodging it and stripping it to the key themes and then repacking it up in our own personal style. That way we can show three things, how much we actually understood it, how much it affected us (the process of unlocking art and a works place in society interests me just as much as the making of it) and lastly, how we could improve it. Only after following this process, can a review become a work of art in itself.

So, if you have something to say about film, and just as importantly, a way to say it. Let me know. I am here to learn how we can expand on these areas and push it in the right direction. If you want a platform to write then hit me up, being the one man band is knackering and I'm open to outside input. If you've already got a platform to write let's exchange ideas and help each other out. If you're too shy to put your thoughts on a platform, let's talk anyway. In essence, let's talk. Talk about it. Talk about it. Talk about it. Talk about, talk about. Talk about MOOOOOOOOOVIES. Yes that was a Lipps Inc. reference. Take me to MovieTown, baby!