Interview with David Ehrlich: IndieWire Senior Film Critic
 |
| David Ehrlich |
I reached out to film critic David Ehrlich and interviewed him regarding this issue amongst other pressing components that are entailed in his profession, such as the consideration of audience and readership.
Ehrlich was previously a Staff Writer at rolling Stone, Associate Film Editor of Time Out New York, the US editor of Little White Lies Magazine, the Senior Editor of Film.com and a contributor to various outlets including Vanity Fair and The Guardian. Ehrlich is currently the Senior Film Critic for IndieWire. This interview took place over email on 1st February, 2018.
How would you describe your film taste and what are some of your favourite films?
This is a hard one! Maybe the hardest one of all. I like movies about movies and understated period romances about unrequited or impossible love. Also, "Ozu" and "Magic Mike XXL". I think that about covers it.
Your work was appeared in outlets such as The Guardian, Vanity Fair and Rolling Stone. Have you had to adjust your style of reviewing to suit their respective readerships?
Yes and no. You always have to be somewhat conscious of who’s paying you and who’s reading you, even if you ultimately have to write for yourself. Of course, that last bit can backfire, especially before you learn where to draw the line — I’ve only written one article for The Guardian (a written-thru interview with Jim Jarmusch), because I decided that the piece would be better at 3,500 words than at the 1,000 words assigned to me. Surely, if I turned it in a month early, the editor would have time to wrap her head around what I had filed. I mean, the article had been commissioned for digital, and the internet has an infinite amount of space! And yet… people only have so much patience. Learn from my mistakes. I worked full-time at Rolling Stone, and it was made clear to me off the hop that I was writing for a broader audience. That didn’t mean I had to dumb things down necessarily, but writing for a general readership is very different than writing a graduate-level film paper; for one thing, it’s more fun.
IndieWire was originally conceived as an online forum and newsletter for filmmakers and festivals and it continues to spotlight and champion independent cinema. Who do you perceive IndieWire's readership to be and do you read films in a particular way because of the outlet's audience?
To answer the last part of the question first: no. And this is a terrible answer, but I perceive IndieWire’s readership to be anyone who cares about film, television, and digital content. That sounds reductive and dismissive, but I don’t mean it to be… it is a real BLESSING to have interested, informed readers who care about film / TV / etc. IndieWire’s identity and goals have evolved with the times, but I think of us as the most accessible trade, for whatever that’s worth. Sorry, I could write an unhelpful sentence about this, or a book, nothing in between!
When reviewing a film, do you ever consider how audiences may respond to the film in discussion (e.g. commercial success and audience taste) or is your critique purely a judgement of the product's quality? Also, how often do you find that your own personal taste affects your reading of a film?
Always try to factor in as much context as possible… when I review “Black Panther,” I’ll be writing with the assumption that everyone has seen or will be seeing the movie. I'm not sure how that will affect what I turn out, but it certainly impacts the tone. On the other hand, writing about an obscure Sundance title like “Madeline’s Madeline,” Yeah, I’m making more of a conscious effort to sell people on being interested in the movie, because I know that I can’t necessarily begin with the assumption that they are. As for my own personal tastes affecting a reading of the film… there is no such thing as objective watching, there is no such thing as objecting reading, and there is no such thing as objective writing. My personal taste affects all three, whether I want it to or not.
Netflix executives Tedd Sarandos and Reed Hastings have recently stated that "critics are pretty disconnected from the mass appeal" after the film Bright performed well with audiences despite it being a critical failure. You yourself gave the film a negative review; how do you view this occasional disparity between commercial movie goers and critics, and what is your response to the executives comment?
First off, the people who made “Bright” know what they did. They also know how to make money. These things happen. As for the question about the disparity between critics and the public… I get it. Movies are not a casual thing for me. I’m not a casual person. I don’t really understand casual interests. I don’t know what it’s like just to go to the movies on Friday night because you want something to do, and then stand at the marquee and look at the titles and go with the one that sounds good. I’m not that guy, I can’t be that guy, and I can’t really write for that guy. I just try not to exclude him. Hopefully, the person who sees one movie a year can read what I have to say about "Star Wars" and find it at least mildly interesting. But if he doesn’t… if he wants to tweet at me: “relax, it’s just a movie about an orc cop, lighten up,” then he and I see the world very differently. For instance, the only people to whom I send unsolicited tweets about how fundamentally they misunderstand their jobs are Republican politicians. Also, I say “he” in this example, because invariably it’s a “he” tweeting me about how “Bright” is awesome and I’m a [insert hateful epithet here]. But I’m sure there are plenty of women and non-binary folks who also feel like I have my head up my ass.
Do you feel a greater responsibility to highlight and discuss smaller independent features who may have a greater struggle finding an audience and becoming a commercial hit compared to studio blockbusters that are increasingly more likely to have guaranteed box-office success?
Yes. It’s also more rewarding (though digging into blockbuster releases can have its upside as well). I view criticism as a creative act, and not consumer advocacy, but it’s always nice when someone sees and enjoys a movie (of any size) specifically because you clued them into it.
You're a member of the New York Film Critics Circle and at the 2017 Awards, Tiffany Haddish was awarded Best Supporting Actress for her role in Girls Trip. The film was a critical and commercial success and Haddish's performance was particularly lauded but didn't receive any awards attention away from critics driven ceremonies. How important do you think it is to give critics a voice in an awards capacity?
I don’t know if it’s important to give critics a voice… we’d just take a voice for ourselves. It’s what we do. Tiffany Haddish was unjustly ignored by the Oscars… but Lesley Manville gave her Paul Thomas Anderson’s phone number at the New York Film Critics Circle’s awards dinner, and now Haddish and PTA are talking about making a movie together, and that’s important.
I write for several film-centred websites, do you advise contributing to as many as I can in order to maximise my reach and develop and adapt my writing style to different readerships?
It’s all about quality, not quantity. You’ll get hired or assigned to write something on the strength of a small handful of articles that showcase your voice and talent, not your entire body of work. Nevertheless, the wider you cast your net, the more people (and the more types of people) you’re likely to catch. So, like anything else in life, it’s all a balancing act. Ultimately, I say go with your gut… you’ll figure out on your own what’s worth your time and what isn’t. All you can do is do your best, be responsible to the people who trust you to deliver work, and keep your fingers crossed that the stars will align. Don’t worry too much about changing yourself — people are looking for strongly flexible singular voices; be a swiss army knife who can (and will) write anything, but always leaves a part of themselves in every piece. Also, don’t overthink it… if you have the capacity to do this and the determination to do this (and the resources to keep doing this until you’re earning enough to support yourself from writing alone), you’ll be able to do this. I believe in you!
Bibliography
Ehrlich, D (2018). Film Review and Criticism. [email]
Bibliography
Ehrlich, D (2018). Film Review and Criticism. [email]
Comments
Post a Comment