Luke Buckmaster: As in your autobiography, I Peed on Fellini, the documentary David Stratton: A Cinematic Life reminisces on the time Geoffrey Wright – the director of Romper Stomper – hurled a glass of wine at you at a party. Do any other stories come to mind, about film-makers who reacted badly to what you’ve written or said?
David Stratton: When I was writing for Variety, way back in the mid-to-late 80s in Cannes, in the first week of the festival I’d been assigned to review an Icelandic film. Reviews in those days were sent off by telex or something, then they’d be printed in the weekly Variety in New York and shipped back to Cannes. So always, the reviews of the first week arrived at the beginning of the second week. I’d written a pretty negative review of this Icelandic film.
I was going up in one of those very small lifts they have in France. A lift that is probably big enough for about two people, and it was crowded with about six people. A guy got in smoking a cigar. I said to him: “Excuse me, do you mind putting that out?” He said to me: [Stratton puts on a menacing voice] “Are you David Stratton?” I said yes. He said: “Well you’re a fucking idiot!”
It turned out this man was the director of that Icelandic film. So not only does he make bad films – he also smokes cigars in lifts.
People do react in strange ways to criticism. I was once told by the director of an Australian film that by giving his film a three-star review in the Guardian I had “damned it by faint praise”. I thought, well, that’s a new one.
I’ve got friends who are film-makers. I don’t know if you stayed until the end credits but A Cinematic Life is dedicated to Paul Cox. Paul and I were very good friends and I loved many of his films, but not all. I remember one year he had a film, and I saw it and was incredibly disappointed with it. I thought well, before I review this on At the Movies I have to let him know. I can’t let him watch it to see what I say.
So I rang him and we had a chat about this and that. I said: “Now Paul, the main reason I rang you is, I have to tell you, I’m not a fan of the film.” His reaction was: “Oh, well of course you’ve got to say it the way the you see it. I’m sorry you didn’t like it but you’ve got to say what you think.” Then I went to air with the review and he rang me up the next day and said: “You really didn’t like it! You’ve broken my heart! I thought we were friends!” That sort of thing can be tough sometimes.
People often gravitate towards hot and cold responses. They particularly like “I love it” or “I hate it” reviews. And this sometimes means good writing can be neglected when a critic’s opinion doesn’t conform to extremities. On the subject of being drawn towards strong opinions, I remember when At the Movies was on television and everybody loved when you and Margaret argued. They were the best bits! Did the producers ever encourage you two to play up to that?
No. Never. And we wouldn’t have if they tried. The thing about At the Movies [on ABC], or The Movie Show [on SBS], was that we always absolutely said what we thought and we didn’t discuss it beforehand. Sometimes Margaret would come out with something and I would be absolutely gobsmacked, and vice versa I think. We just didn’t know what was coming. There was genuine reaction there, which I think was probably detected by audiences.
The other thing about what you’re saying: I think the easiest reviews to write are the ones that are either very positive or very negative. It’s the ones in between that are really hard to write. The sort of three-star review. I think they are the trickiest ones, to explain that the film is not bad – it’s pretty good – but it doesn’t quite get there. It can also be hard to write about Australian films.
How so?
Well it sort of breaks my heart when I see an Australian film I love and, well, let me use the example of Charlie’s Country, Rolf de Heer’s film, which I thought was a great film. But one reviewer, who I won’t name, gave it a really negative review. I thought at the time, oh, that is incredibly damaging. Incredibly ungenerous. But worse than that, really damaging to the film.
When we review Australian films it can be an added concern. Don’t get me wrong: I think the reviewer’s principal debt is to the readership, or the viewers, or the radio listeners. They are the ones you must be honest with. But at the same time, it can be very difficult, being a smaller industry where everybody knows everybody and reviews can really make a difference.
The internet has led to more hobby or part-time film critics joining the discussion. I think this is generally a fantastic thing, in that the culture is now perhaps more active than ever. But I also believe it can be quite hard on these writers. I think that reviewing consistently – week in, week out, even and perhaps especially when you don’t necessarily feel like doing it – is a very important part of a critic developing their voice.
I totally agree. Young people quite often get in touch with me and ask, how do you become a film critic? Apart from saying you’ve got to be in the right place at the right time and it’s all a matter of luck – because there is that element – I tell them that first of all, you’ve got to see lots and lots and lots of films. And you’ve got to write about them. As soon as you see something, write about it – even if it’s never going to be published or put online. Just write about it. Have an opinion about it. Analyse it. Put something down.
So the best advice is simple: watch more and write more.
Yes. As you may know, I have this kind of self-imposed regimen that I want to see a new film every day. I want to see a film I’ve never seen before every day. I went to a preview screening this morning, so that’s my film for today. If it’s not a new film then I will seek out something that’s not new – as long as I haven’t seen it before.
I’ve got a big pile of films waiting to be looked at. Every time I see one – even if I am never going to review it – I always write what is in effect a review. I fill out an A4-sized sheet of paper. I’m very old-fashioned, so I print it out and file it away under the year the film was made. That’s how I can find them if I need them.
For my notes I now use an app that syncs all the notes across my laptop, computer and smartphone. So I guess it’s the same kind of behaviour but with better technology. My notes also include the names of the people who worked on the film – usually just the director and the principal cast, so I can find them easily if I search the app later.
My notes still start with the place I saw the film on the top left corner. Underneath that the date, then the title and the country of production, the year of production, the director, the running time, the principal cast and then the notes. Though I probably didn’t write down the running time when I started doing this, when I was 10 years old.
What made me passionate about that – running times – is the period when I was writing for Variety. In Variety, every reviewer is expected to time the film in order to give an exact running time, because we often found the running times given out by distributors or producers were inaccurate. Sometimes deliberately so. The Variety policy was always to time every film, and I still do that. Which means you have to stay until the end of the credits of course.
One thing over the years that I’ve struggled with as a concept is the star rating. With written reviews, eyeballs tend to go to the stars first. Often people ask, “how many stars?” Not “what did you think?” I think there is a compelling argument to say the star rating system cheapens film criticism, or distracts from the power and persuasiveness of the critic’s writing.
I agree. But I am afraid that we – Margaret and I – might be guilty of bringing it to Australia. When we started the show we were wondering how to provide a quick indication of the film. The Roger Ebert program was always thumbs up or thumbs down, and that seemed terribly black and white.
People were doing it overseas but I think we were the first ones to do it in Australia. That was 1986. And then of course everybody did it. It’s maybe not the best way because people may think, oh two stars – I might not bother to read the review. But like I said, I must confess that Margaret and I might be guilty here.
• David Stratton: A Cinematic Life is screening in cinemas now. Stratton will also be appearing in Q&A sessions at select screenings around Australia in February and March
View all comments >