Newspapers showing critics the door

Tastemakers have relevance questioned

By DIANE GARRETT

Studios have long questioned the relevance of film critics. Now, even newspapers are doing it.

Many have recently eliminated their longtime critics, opting to pick up reviews from outside sources rather than devote dwindling resources to film criticism at a time when the blogosphere is exploding with all sorts of film critiques and opinion.

Smaller suburban papers have long used wire copy instead of self-generated reviews. But now major dailies around the country are advancing the trend. The San Diego Union-Tribune just axed longtime film critic David Elliott. Detroit's Free Press is in no rush to replace Terry Lawson after his exit under a voluntary buyout. And the New York Daily News has announced no replacement as yet for veteran opiner Jack Mathews who is retiring at month's end to write a novel.

The Orange County Register said goodbye to critic Henry Sheehan in 2002, replacing his work with reviews from another Freedom newspaper, and the Chicago Tribune saw Michael Wilmington exit to the L.A. Times.

Even alt-weeklies once dedicated to fostering individual voices -- think the Village Voice -- have been taken over by chains that run reviews from critics elsewhere in the chain.

Does it matter if a paper has its own critical voice?

Bean-counters argue that since the same films are shown everywhere, the critic's hometown is irrelevant.

And critics of critics question the need for thoughtful assessment of formulaic fare that moviegoers will gobble up regardless what their local paper says. Negative reviews didn't dent "Cloverfield's" early grosses, but bad word of mouth -- and competish from pics targeted to the same demo -- hit the followup frame.

Still, it's hard for film fans -- and entertainment journos -- not to be taken aback by the pervasiveness of the trend and underlying message that one review fits all.

After all, auds in different regions of the country respond to certain subjects -- like, say, teen pregnancy, religion and politics -- differently than they might in other locales. A critic who lives in the community he or she is writing for would understand and reflect that.

On the other hand, with zillions of bloggers posting opinions great and small about movies and other matters cultural, moviegoers have plenty of places to seek guidance about a film before plunking down coin for a babysitter. Savvy studio marketers cultivate these bloggers to help spread the word on their films.

But smaller, more challenging, films frequently need championing to break through. And that's where critics prove most effective.

But as newspapersface increasing pressure to trim costs while covering issues with greater urgency than the arts cutbacks are likely to winnow the critics' ranks even further.

The heyday of the local critic may soon be gone forever -- if it isn't already.