"I would consider this a wholly unreliable and unrealistic review...The cynicism demonstated by this review shows a man ill-equipped for his job."

This is a comment I received from someone upset over the fact that, in my review on this site, I called Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel "dull". It's obvious that Cinematical reader "Juno" really enjoyed the film, but is my review unreliable? Unrealistic? Am I really ill-equipped for my job?

The real way to tell if I'm not equipped to review the film would be if she made the exact same statement, even if I liked it. If I thought it was a blast watching The Chipmunks sing and dance, just like she did, would she still say I'm unreliable, unrealistic, and ill-equipped? She should, if I truly am that bad of a critic. She would never do that, though, and there's the rub. I don't like a film, and sometimes people get really upset. Where does the anger come from? Are there really throngs of people waiting to let the critics guide their every ticket-purchasing decision? I don't think so. I have to assume "Juno" doesn't like every single movie she sees. Why am I, as a critic, not afforded the same right without people telling me my opinion is a wrong one?
categories Cinematical