The history of film reviews in English is a fascinating journey that mirrors the evolution of cinema itself. From the earliest days of silent films to the modern era of streaming and social media, the way we critique and discuss movies has undergone a dramatic transformation. This article explores the key eras, influential critics, and technological shifts that have shaped English-language film criticism.
The Birth of Film Criticism (1890s-1920s)
In the nascent years of cinema, film criticism was rudimentary and often conflated with journalism. Early reviews were brief, focusing on plot summaries and technical observations rather than deep analysis. For instance, the first known film review appeared in the New York Daily Tribune in 1896, discussing the Edison Kinetoscope’s “The Corbett-Fitzsimmons Fight.” The review was more of a novelty report than a critical assessment.
During the silent era, critics like H.L. Mencken (writing for The Smart Set and The American Mercury) began to treat film as a serious art form. Mencken’s 1920 review of The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari praised its expressionist style, noting: “It is a nightmare in celluloid, a thing of shadows and distorted perspectives.” This marked a shift from mere description to interpretive criticism.
The 1920s also saw the rise of specialized film magazines. Photoplay (founded 1911) and Motion Picture Magazine (1913) catered to fans with star-focused content, while Close-Up (1927-1933) in the UK offered more avant-garde criticism. A notable example is Iris Barry’s 1929 review of The Passion of Joan of Arc, where she wrote: “Dreyer’s film is not a biography but a spiritual trial, a visual poem of suffering and transcendence.”
The Golden Age of Studio System and Print Media (1930s-1950s)
The studio system’s dominance in Hollywood led to a more structured critical landscape. Major newspapers and magazines established dedicated film sections, and critics became influential tastemakers. Otis Ferguson at The New Republic (1934-1942) was known for his democratic approach, praising both high art and popular entertainment. His 1939 review of The Wizard of Oz captured the film’s magic: “It is a fairy tale that knows it’s a fairy tale, and that makes all the difference.”
The post-WWII period saw the rise of auteur theory, pioneered by French critics at Cahiers du Cinéma, but its influence spread to English-language criticism. James Agee, writing for The Nation (1942-1948), became one of America’s most respected film critics. His 1948 review of The Bicycle Thief is a masterpiece of empathetic criticism: “De Sica’s film is a simple story, but its simplicity is the result of profound artistic discipline. It achieves a kind of moral clarity that is rare in cinema.”
The 1950s introduced television, which initially threatened cinema but also created new platforms for criticism. Bosley Crowther of The New York Times (1943-1967) was the most powerful critic of his era, with his reviews often determining a film’s commercial fate. His mixed review of Psycho (1960) famously called it “a cheap trick,” highlighting the tension between popular taste and critical judgment.
The New Hollywood and the Rise of Academic Criticism (1960s-1970s)
The 1960s and 1970s were a revolutionary period for both cinema and criticism. The collapse of the studio system and the rise of New Hollywood directors like Coppola, Scorsese, and Spielberg demanded new critical approaches. Pauline Kael at The New Yorker (1968-1991) became the era’s most influential critic, known for her passionate, personal style. Her 1972 review of The Godfather is iconic: “It is a masterpiece of popular art, a film that understands the American myth of power and family.”
Simultaneously, academic film studies emerged as a discipline. Andrew Sarris’s The American Cinema (1968) popularized auteur theory in the US, while Laura Mulvey’s “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema” (1175) introduced feminist film theory. These theoretical frameworks transformed how critics analyzed films, moving beyond plot and performance to examine ideology, form, and spectatorship.
The 1970s also saw the rise of alternative publications. Film Comment (founded 1962) and Sight & Sound (1932) provided platforms for more serious criticism, while underground zines like The Velvet Light Trap (1969) offered radical perspectives. A key example is Molly Haskell’s 1974 review of The Conversation, which applied feminist theory to analyze Coppola’s film: “It is a study of male paranoia and technological alienation, a critique of the surveillance state.”
The Blockbuster Era and the Rise of Video (1980s-1990s)
The 1980s brought the blockbuster, with films like Jaws (1975) and Star Wars (1977) changing the industry. Critics had to adapt to this new commercial reality. Roger Ebert (writing for the Chicago Sun-Times from 1967 until his death in 2013) became the most recognizable film critic in America, known for his accessible, humanistic approach. His 1982 review of E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial exemplifies his style: “It is a film that understands childhood, not as a sentimental ideal but as a state of wonder and vulnerability.”
The advent of home video in the 1980s revolutionized film consumption and criticism. Critics could now analyze films frame-by-frame, and video essays emerged as a new critical form. David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson’s Film Art: An Introduction (1979) became the standard textbook, teaching students to analyze films formally. Their 1985 analysis of Blade Runner in Film Quarterly demonstrated how video technology enabled deeper formal analysis: “Scott’s use of deep focus and layered composition creates a visual density that rewards repeated viewings.”
The 1990s saw the rise of independent cinema and the festival circuit. Jonathan Rosenbaum at the Chicago Reader (1984-2008) championed overlooked films and filmmakers, while Manohla Dargis at the Village Voice (1991-2004) brought a feminist and queer perspective. Her 1994 review of The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert celebrated its subversive humor: “It is a road movie that reclaims the genre from male-dominated narratives, celebrating drag as a form of radical self-expression.”
The Digital Revolution and the Age of Aggregation (2000s-2010s)
The internet transformed film criticism in the 2000s. Blogs, forums, and early social media democratized criticism, allowing anyone to publish reviews. Roger Ebert embraced this change, launching his blog in 2002 and engaging directly with readers. His 2009 review of Avatar sparked a global conversation about 3D technology and cinematic spectacle.
The rise of aggregator sites like Rotten Tomatoes (2004) and Metacritic (1999) changed how films were marketed and perceived. The “Tomatometer” became a crucial metric for studios and audiences alike. This led to debates about the reduction of criticism to a binary score. A.O. Scott of The New York Times (2000-2022) often lamented this trend, writing in his 2015 review of The Martian: “The film’s 92% on Rotten Tomatoes tells us nothing about its qualities as a film; it only measures consensus.”
The 2010s saw the rise of video essays on YouTube and Vimeo. Channels like Every Frame a Painting (2014-2016) and Nerdwriter1 (2015-present) used visual analysis to explain film techniques to a mass audience. For example, Every Frame a Painting’s 2015 video on The Social Network broke down David Fincher’s editing patterns, showing how rapid cuts create tension and character psychology.
The Current Era: Streaming, Social Media, and the Future (2020s-Present)
The 2020s have accelerated digital trends. Streaming platforms like Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Disney+ have changed how films are released and consumed. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated this shift, with many films premiering directly on streaming. Critics now review films that may never have a theatrical release, as seen with Netflix’s *The Irishman* (2019), which received widespread critical acclaim despite its limited theatrical run.
Social media platforms like Twitter, Letterboxd, and TikTok have become central to film discourse. Letterboxd (founded 2011) has evolved into a social network for film lovers, where users log and review films. Its 2023 review of Oppenheimer by user @filmnerd42 went viral: “Nolan’s film is a historical epic that feels like a thriller, a meditation on the weight of creation and destruction.”
The rise of AI and algorithmic recommendations has also impacted criticism. Platforms like YouTube use algorithms to promote video essays, sometimes prioritizing engagement over depth. Meanwhile, traditional critics face challenges from clickbait and viral content. David Ehrlich at IndieWire (2016-present) has adapted by creating engaging, meme-friendly reviews that still offer substantive analysis, as seen in his 2023 review of Barbie: “Gerwig’s film is a pink-hued manifesto that deconstructs the doll’s cultural legacy while celebrating its joy.”
Conclusion: The Enduring Value of Film Criticism
Despite technological and cultural shifts, the core purpose of film criticism remains: to deepen our understanding and appreciation of cinema. From Mencken’s early praise of expressionism to today’s TikTok reviews, critics have continually adapted their methods to new media and audiences. The era of English-language film reviews is far from over; it is evolving, becoming more inclusive, diverse, and accessible. As we move forward, the challenge will be to maintain critical depth in an age of information overload, ensuring that film criticism continues to enrich our cultural conversation.
This article is based on historical research and critical analysis of film criticism’s evolution. For further reading, consider:
- The Film Criticism of Otis Ferguson (2001)
- Pauline Kael: A Life in Film (2011)
- The New York Times Film Reviews (1999)
- Roger Ebert’s Journal (2002-2013)
- Letterboxd’s Year in Review (2023)