Most people watch movies. But how many actually know how to read a film critique? It’s not about whether the reviewer liked it or not. It’s about understanding film critiques as a form of communication - one that reveals assumptions, biases, and cultural blind spots. If you’ve ever walked away from a review thinking, “Wait, that’s not what I saw at all,” you’re not alone. The problem isn’t the critic. It’s that most viewers haven’t been taught how to read between the lines.
Why Film Critiques Are Not Just Opinions
A film critique isn’t a Yelp review for movies. It’s a structured argument built on evidence. Good critics don’t say, “I hated this.” They say, “The pacing collapses in the third act because the script ignores character motivation, reducing emotional stakes to clichés.” That’s analysis. Not taste.Think of it like reading a recipe. You don’t just taste the cake - you notice if the baker skipped the eggs, used low-quality flour, or baked it too hot. A critique does the same for film. It points to lighting choices, editing rhythm, sound design, framing, casting decisions - all the tools that shape meaning.
But here’s the catch: most audiences are never taught how to spot those tools. Schools teach plot summaries, not visual grammar. Social media rewards hot takes, not close reading. As a result, people mistake emotion for insight. A critic says, “The protagonist feels hollow,” and viewers think, “They just don’t like the actor.” That’s not critical thinking. That’s confusion.
What Makes a Film Critique Legitimate?
Not every review is a critique. Here’s how to tell the difference:- Legitimate critique: References specific scenes, shots, or techniques. Uses terms like diegetic sound, motif, mise-en-scène, narrative structure.
- Not a critique: “This movie sucked.” “The lead was boring.” “I cried at the end.”
Legitimate critiques anchor judgment in observable details. They ask: How did the filmmaker achieve this effect? Was it intentional? Was it effective? They don’t just say what they felt - they explain how the film made them feel it.
Take the 2023 film Oppenheimer. One review called it “a boring lecture.” Another noted, “The 180-minute runtime mirrors the weight of moral responsibility - the film doesn’t cut away from silence, forcing the audience to sit with guilt.” The first is opinion. The second is critique.
Teaching the Skills: How to Break Down a Critique
If you want to teach someone - a student, a friend, a child - how to read a film critique, start with these steps:- Identify the claim. What is the critic’s main point? Is it about direction? Representation? Political message?
- Find the evidence. Where in the film does this show up? What scene? What shot? What line of dialogue?
- Check the assumptions. What does the critic believe about cinema? About power? About history? Are they judging the film by its own rules, or by someone else’s?
- Compare perspectives. Read two reviews of the same film - one positive, one negative. Where do they agree? Where do they diverge? Why?
- Ask: “What’s missing?” Who isn’t represented? Whose voice isn’t heard? Are there blind spots in the critic’s own background?
Try this exercise with Barbie (2023). One critic praised its satire of patriarchy. Another called it shallow because it ignored the experiences of women of color. Both are valid. But only one explains why. That’s the difference between reaction and analysis.
The Role of Bias - In Critics and Viewers
No one is neutral. Critics bring their own history, culture, and experiences to a film. So do viewers. The key is recognizing that.A critic who grew up in rural Texas might see Everything Everywhere All At Once as chaotic nonsense. A critic raised in Hong Kong might see it as a brilliant fusion of martial arts cinema and immigrant anxiety. Neither is “right.” But the second one can explain why the film works for certain audiences - because they understand its roots.
Teaching media literacy means teaching people to ask: Who is speaking? What do they stand to gain? What are they not seeing? A critique that ignores class, race, or gender isn’t just incomplete - it’s misleading.
When a review says, “This movie is too slow,” it might really mean, “I’m used to fast edits and loud music.” That’s not a flaw in the film. That’s a flaw in the viewer’s expectations. Media literacy helps people separate personal preference from artistic intent.
How Streaming Has Changed the Game
Ten years ago, critics wrote for newspapers, magazines, or film journals. Today, anyone with a YouTube channel can be a critic. That’s not all bad. It’s democratized the conversation.But it’s also flooded the space with noise. Algorithm-driven platforms reward outrage, not insight. A video titled “Why This Movie Is the Worst of the Decade” gets 5 million views. A thoughtful 20-minute breakdown on cinematography gets 50,000.
That’s why teaching film critique has never been more urgent. People need tools to filter the signal from the noise. They need to know:
- Who funds the review? (Is it a studio affiliate?)
- How long has the reviewer been watching films? (Do they know film history?)
- Are they reacting to the film - or to the hype around it?
Netflix, Amazon, and Disney+ don’t teach critical thinking. They teach consumption. Media literacy fills the gap.
Real-World Examples: What Works
In Asheville, a local high school started a “Critique Club” last year. Students watched three films - Parasite, The Father, and Minari - and wrote reviews using a simple framework: What did you see? What did it mean? Why did it matter?One student reviewed Parasite and wrote: “The stairs aren’t just architecture - they’re the class system. The rich live above, the poor crawl below. The rain doesn’t just fall - it floods the basement, washing away their dignity.” That’s not a student trying to sound smart. That’s someone learning to see.
Another student compared two reviews of Minari. One praised its quiet realism. The other called it “boring because nothing happens.” The student wrote: “The critic who called it boring didn’t notice the silence was the point. The film isn’t about big events. It’s about the weight of waiting.” That’s media literacy in action.
Where to Start - For Teachers, Parents, and Curious Viewers
You don’t need a film degree to start teaching this. Here’s how:- Watch with someone. Pause the movie. Ask: “What just happened? Why do you think the director chose that shot?”
- Read two reviews side by side. Use sites like Rotten Tomatoes or Letterboxd. Compare how different critics describe the same scene.
- Use free resources. The Criterion Collection’s essays, the YouTube channel “Lessons from the Screenplay,” and the podcast “The Big Picture” are all free and excellent.
- Challenge the “I just know what I like” mindset. Ask: “What makes you like it? What’s the craft behind that feeling?”
Media literacy isn’t about becoming a film scholar. It’s about becoming a smarter viewer. It’s about not letting someone else’s take be your only take.
What Happens When We Don’t Teach This
Without media literacy, audiences become passive. They accept hot takes as truth. They think a movie is “bad” because a viral tweet said so. They don’t question why certain stories get told - and others don’t.Look at the backlash against Black Panther or Wonder Woman. Some critics praised them as groundbreaking. Others dismissed them as “just superhero movies.” But the people who dismissed them weren’t judging the filmmaking - they were reacting to the idea of Black or female heroes. That’s not critique. That’s prejudice disguised as opinion.
Teaching people how to read film critiques isn’t about protecting art. It’s about protecting thought. It’s about giving people the tools to think for themselves - not just react to trends.
Final Thought: You’re Already Watching. Are You Seeing?
The next time you watch a movie and read a review, pause. Don’t just agree or disagree. Ask: What did they notice that I didn’t? What did they miss? How did they get there?That’s not just good viewing. That’s media literacy. And it’s the most important skill no one’s teaching - but everyone needs.
What’s the difference between a movie review and a film critique?
A movie review is usually a quick opinion - “I liked it” or “It sucked.” A film critique is an analytical argument that uses specific examples from the film - shots, editing, sound, performance - to support a deeper claim about meaning, technique, or cultural impact. One expresses taste. The other explains how art works.
Can I learn to read film critiques without formal training?
Absolutely. Start by watching films with someone and pausing to discuss what you see. Read two reviews of the same movie and compare how they describe the same scene. Use free resources like Criterion Collection essays or YouTube channels like “Lessons from the Screenplay.” It’s not about memorizing terms - it’s about asking better questions.
Why do some critics hate movies that audiences love?
Critics often judge films based on craft, originality, and cultural context. Audiences often respond to emotion, nostalgia, or entertainment value. A movie like John Wick might be criticized for its thin plot but loved for its choreography and tone. Neither side is wrong - but understanding why they disagree is the point of media literacy.
Are film critics still relevant in the age of YouTube and TikTok?
Yes - but their role has changed. Professional critics aren’t gatekeepers anymore. They’re guides. In a sea of viral hot takes, thoughtful analysis stands out. People who want to understand film - not just consume it - still need critics who can explain how and why a movie works. The problem isn’t that critics are irrelevant. It’s that we’ve stopped teaching people how to listen to them.
How do I know if a film critique is biased?
Look for three things: Does the critic ignore context? Do they dismiss a film because of who made it or who’s in it? Do they use vague language like “it’s boring” without explaining why? A biased critique assumes its values are universal. A strong critique acknowledges its perspective and backs claims with evidence from the film itself.
Comments(7)