First off, just to keep the pet trolls away, I'll say that I don't hate movie critics. Afterall, "movie critics" is too big a generalization to make, don't you think?
But for the sake of simplicity in this post, I think I could use a bit of generalization for now...
In my opinion, movie critics generally over-analyze the technical aspects of a movie and often overlooks its emotional expression. Not saying that objective analysis is not important, but like music, although techniques are essential, musical expressions is what contributes to its artistic significance/value. It is wrong to ignore the fact that movies are also a type of "art" (I'm not going to argue about the specific definition here); what matters the most is the feeling/emotion that the audience recieves when viewing the artwork, and while technical aspects are crucial to effectively transmit their expression to the audience, it have no significant value outside its sole purpose.
(In other words, like in literature where grammar and writing structures are crucial elements for the reader to at least understand what the writer is saying before actually being able to feel the emotion, if the writer did not even put in his/her emotion in the first place then the work does not have any significant value other than being a technical model used for demonstration in English classes, nothing but a poetically refined "Friday".)
Now back at movie critics; because they evaluate the technical sides of a movie so much, it is not uncommon to see them overlooking emotional measure (often being the core value of the film) and giving it an undeserving rating -- on the part that wasn't of any significance. It's like looking at a Dayan Guhong and say that it's a crap cube just because "it looks weird"; that wasn't even the point!
Though I should also say that the critics do have their valuable sides; sometimes the public opinions are too biased due to various influences, in this case the critics would be able to analyze objectively and peel away decieving coatings of gimmicks, trends, and big names. This shed some light upon the ignorance of many that even I finds irritating at times.
These guys are kind of overly harsh sometimes, but I think it is only as a result of seeing mass number of films that they were "forced" to analyze movies skeptically; I do feel somewhat sorry for them that they could not just enjoy movie innocently and feel the expressivness of the director. If somehow the general audiance could learn a bit of their intelligence and not being so ignorant, and the skeptics regain some of the innocence, we might find less gems hidden away and more good films around, as filmmakers are encouraged to produce what really is good, and not just what the people wants.
Verdict: Brother Bear is awesome, everyone go watch it NAO!
What are you guys' opinion on movie critics?