No, they don't have much to do with each other, but those are the two topics that have me all rant-y today. Thus, the ranting shall begin.
Film Critics:
Why are they all fucking morons?
Ok, I take that back. They're not ALL fucking morons. But I'll be damned if 70% of them actually know what it means to critique a movie. Apperantly, most film "critics" thing that doing that is simply saying whether or not they liked the movie.
Well, YES, that is PART of it, but it's far from everything that goes into it. You see, not everyone has the same tastes. Everyone has these things called opinions. Some people like comedies while others love horror. The whole reason you get PAID to write an ARTICLE is so EVERYONE can read about the movie and decide for themselves to go see it. We don't have seperate reviewers to review different genres of movies. That would be pointless and stupid.
Now, before I continue, I'll describe what, exactly, launched me into this diatribe in the first place. You see, I had just come home from the hell-hole that is telerecruiting (more on that later), and I was bored and randomly looked up some movie reviews for what's playing right now. Well, after I looked at all those, I was still bored, and decided to go read reviews of some of my favorite movies.
The very first movie I looked up was Stay, which was realeased last year and essentially bombed because no one ever saw it or had heard of it. Anyway, at rottentomatoes.com, I found TONS of these negative reviews.
I was shocked. I absolutely LOVED this movie, and 99% of all these reviewers gave it abysmal scores. So I read a few of the reviews.
Why did they find the movie so horrible? They all claimed that it didn't make any sense.
Yes, just because YOU'RE too stupid to understand it, that makes it a horrible movie. Comments ranged from the incomrehensible plot to pointless camera tricks to fashion complaints (yes, some stupid whore actually said that since the main character wasn't fashionable, she couldn't concentrate on the rest of the movie . . .).
Ok, now, Stay is definitely not your standard pop-corn entertainment flim. I admit that after I first saw it, I was rather confused. I kind of had an idea of what was going on in it, but I wasn't quite sure. I went back and I saw it again, and it made much more sense. And ever since I got it on DVD, each viewing reveals more that I hadn't noticed before, that further explain the story.
Stay (along with movies like Donnie Darko and Mullholland Drive) is, to me, the ultimate in film art. These are stories so profound and engaging that they could only be told in a cinematic form. They fully use all the facets of film to create a totally unique experience.
Basically, these "critics" gave Stay bad scores because they couldn't be bothered to try and understand it. One of the most fascinating films I've ever seen probably bombed, largely due to stupid film "critics" that fail at their job. Was this movie for everyone? Certainly not. The fact is that most of the movie-going populace isn't looking for a deep emotional, intellectual experience; they're going to sit and be mindlessly entertained (not that there's anything wrong with that. I'm in that mood myself sometimes.).
Critics have the responsibility to explain enough about the movie so that every person has enough information to make their own decision about whether they would like to see it or not. A critic who hates romantic comedies can't very well bomb every romantic comedy he sees. Sure, he may not like it, but in critiquing, he has to look at it without personal bias and judge it for what it is. You may not like a movie, but it can still be well made. A shoddy movie can still be entertaining.
Granted, personal opinion can still come into play, even when trying to be objective. But this absurd "If the movie doesn't spoon feed me entertainment, that means it's bad" schtick is fucking stupid.
Telemarketing:
I really really hate working at the Red Cross. I've been wating to work there for YEARS, and now that I'm there, I can't stop thinking about how bad I want to leave.
The company itself is great. It's all I'd ever want in an employer. But my position sucks ASS. The bad way.
You see, I have to call up previous donors and schedule them to come back in and donate again. No problem, right? I mean, if they've donated before, then they'd probably be willing, if not excited, to come back in again, right?
That couldn't be more wrong. I mean, in theory, yeah. But in practice, the way the job is set up, it's just fucking ridiculous.
Today I started out by calling people in the middle of nowhere, and trying to get them to drive 30+ miles to come donate blood. Who the hell is going to be able, let alone willing, to make a 1 hour round trip to donate blood!? So now I look like an asshole trying to get them to go so far out of their way, and by extension, the Red Cross organization looks like an asshole as well.
Then, I swear, about 25% of the time, the people I call will get mad because:
A)The Red Cross calls them all the time, and they're sick of it B)The just donated blood a week or so ago, and can't donate for 2 months, so why are we bothering them C)They've been turned away the last X amount of times they've tried to donate, and are sick of being told they can't
And all of these are very valid reasons for being upset/annoyed. So WHY THE FUCK AM I CALLING THEM!? Why the fuck would I call someone if there isn't a drive anywhere near them? Why the fuck would I call someone when they JUST donated the other day and we should KNOW that they can't donate again for 2 months!? And why the FUCK am I calling someone that this organization has already told in the past that they can't donate!?
I mean, these calls aren't going to get anyone to come in no matter how much I suck up to the person. They're a waste of the donor's time, and they're a waste of my time. Who ever puts together these lists of people needs to be fired.
Then there's the fact that we supposedly appreciate our donors, yet we don't even know who we're calling until several seconds after the person picks up the phone. I have to stammer and stall while I wait for the computer to tell me who the hell I'm trying to talk to. Yeah, I'm sure that makes them feel REAL special.
Oh, and some of the time, the computer system is down, or the blooddrive isn't under one database, so I'm calling people to schedule appointments, but the computer thinks that the blooddrive doesn't exist, so I can't do anything but say, "Sorry, I guess that drive I called you about doesn't exist. Have a nice day. Bye"
Or, there aren't any appointment slots left. "Yeah, I'd love to come donate blood! I can be there at 6:00 after I get off work. What? Your only open slots are at 2:00? I thought you were in NEED of donors, but you seem to have a full blooddrive as it is, don't you."
And finally, there's the fact that most of the time, I can't even get ahold of people. More than half of every call I do ends up being an answering machine or the person's wife/husband/kids/whatever, and I have to call back another time.
So, yeah, I'm lucky if I even get to talk to 4 people I'm trying to get ahold of an hour, let alone schedule 4 appointments. This is just so ridiculous, and it's set up so stupidly I can't stand it.
