9 Comments
Sep 15, 2023Liked by Vince Mancini

Ok, so now we know the numbers are fake. Now do an essay about how they're also gay.

Expand full comment

I don't want to go on a big poli-sci rant here, but there's a book I recommend to anyone interested in how governments work called "Seeing Like a State" that touches on parts of what you're talking about here.  Public administration has become increasingly taken over by tech trends, as though the ability to measure a thing contributes meaningfully to how well government actually helps people's lives.  Short answer: it could, but not if measuring becomes the primary focus.  Just like how claiming to measure if a movie is good doesn't actually help make better movies.

It becomes an exercise in doing what is measurable, rather than what is necessary or helpful.  All of which would be irritating enough, but then you also have to deal with the fucking cheerleaders who watch Ted Talks about e-government and think they've stumbled on a radical new way of doing things.  

Expand full comment
founding

"A 2022 film that won an Oscar, which premiered at a film festival “a few months before,” that had a 100% recommended rating at some point."

Only considering the first two criteria, there are three candidates: The Whale, Women Talking, and All Quiet On The Western Front. I think it's Women - there were negative reviews of The Whale right out of the gate, and Western was a late-season push after all the other Netflix Oscar candidates flamed out.

That was a fun way to occupy my lunch break.

Expand full comment
founding

Vince, I already subscribe at the highest level you allow us to pay, but whenever you write these columns about the seedy underbelly of the film criticism industry I feel like I should be paying you even more. It's understandably heartening to you as an insider to have all of these shenanigans openly outed, but it's also validating to those of us laymen/consumer piggies who have been wondering if things really are getting worse, or if we are just getting older and grumpier. Now I can safely say both are true.

Expand full comment

Humans need simple answers. Narrative is in our biology.

Lightning? Probably a magic guy on a cloud throwing it at us.

My crops failed? A witch did it.

The other guy won? Threat to Democracy.

That's what our quest for the One True Number is all about. Looking at a number is the ultimate in simple answers. If we could just quantify all the metrics - feelings and emotions and art and opinions, we could assign a weight to each one, add them up, create an average and BAM! If this thing's number is bigger than that thing's number, this thing is better.

It's hard not to fall in love with that. It's logic and reason. It's numbers and math and SCIENCE (I F*cking Love Science!). There's no room for ambiguity or qualifiers. This number here? It's a cold hard fact, and there's metrics and a methodology to back it up. Don't agree? Fuck you, you're wrong - this number, right here, proves it.

Expand full comment

I assume "this number, right here" that proves it, is the number one, symbolically represented by an angrily displayed middle finger?

Expand full comment

Ethan Strauss wrote a really good piece about the doctored numbers HBO and live sports are now peddling as well: https://www.houseofstrauss.com/p/the-great-tv-vaguening

Expand full comment

Another great chapter for the book I think you should write about the modern film criticism and audience consumption landscape.

Expand full comment

Love the banner image. The dude looks like a soft-focus lovechild of Baby Billy and John Carpenter eagerly awaiting a feeding of upside-down crosses amd aramaic letters.

All we need is to pan up to reveal Alice Cooper's character from "Prince of Darkness" tossing these figments from his hand like a geriatric rock god feeding the ducks and I'm sure someone in Hollywood would buy a spec script on sight.

Expand full comment