			Criticizing Joel Siegel
It’s one thing to be offended by a movie. It’s another thing to be offended by a movie so much that you get up and leave in the middle of it. But, to throw a temper tantrum for the sake of throwing one and interrupting a press screening…that’s just childish. Especially when the person having the temper tantrum is a 25-year news veteran who lost his composure over absolutely nothing. When I initially heard about Joel Siegel, the film critic for ABC’s “Good Morning America,” storming out of the Clerks II screening back on July 17^th, I really wasn’t that surprised. In fact, I was pretty amused by the entire incident. Come on, a 63 year old film critic was offended by a couple of lackadaisical counter-jockeys discussing a donkey show? Yeah, who didn’t see that one coming? When the New York Post reported how Siegel stood up 40 minutes into the movie and yelled, “That’s it!” and, “This is the first movie I’ve walked out of in 30 fucking years!,” I knew immediately that Siegel’s disruptive exit from the theater had crossed the line of professionalism and dived headfirst into the land of drama queens.[1] Apparently, I’m not the only one who thought Siegel’s interruption was uncalled for – Kevin Smith’s reaction was pretty much the same as mine. On his website, “silentbobspeaks.com,” the director states, “I’ve now spoken to three folks in attendance last night, and all have said that Siegel WANTED everyone to know how disgusted he was, and that he was leaving. If you want to share your displeasure with everyone, that’s fine, dude; just do it AFTER the movie, not during. Some folks were enjoying themselves.”[2] Like Smith, the main reason I’m finding Siegel’s antics a little hard to stomach is the fact that he is a PROFESSIONAL FILM CRITIC! Hey Joel, do you know what ‘subjectivity’ means? It means your opinion wasn’t the only one in that theater full of people you disrupted. Really Joel, I’m not kidding…just because you are entitled to your opinion doesn’t mean the rest of us are. Another reason I’m irritated with the mustachioed blowhard is the fact that he is a 25-year news veteran who should be able to control his temper better than my 6-year old niece. I’m still trying to figure out how someone who “watches an average of 200 movies a year” considers his disruption of a press screening to be acceptable behavior?[3] Was he really that offended by what he saw onscreen? Or, is this just an example of how low the drama queen will sink in order to generate more press for himself? Huummm…. As long as crusty, old Joel Siegel has been in the news business, you’d think he would realize his little hissy-fit generated more publicity for Clerks II, than if he had just left quietly and written a bad review – or had not reviewed it at all. Ask any media whore, they know that “no press is bad press.” Siegel knows this. He’s not stupid. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have lasted in this business as long as he has. So, that leads me to believe the pompous, out-of-date windbag’s constant need for attention is the real reason behind his outburst.
Image courtesy of Royce Carlton	Personally, I don’t care for film critics who cross over from print to television because that’s when they start to lose their edge. For some reason, it seems as if the moment they trade in their faceless pens for boob tube glory, these “critics” turn into whiny, condescending, politically correct movie recommenders. No, I take that back, they’re not movie recommenders – they’re publicists. Of course, the question you need to ask yourself then turns into what they are publicizing: a movie, themselves, or both?
According to his bio as a “Royce Carlton Speaker,” Siegel’s television career includes being with Good Morning America since 1981, six Emmy Awards, and his show, Joel Siegel’s Road to the Academy Awards, broadcast for more than 15 years and syndicated in over 150 markets worldwide.[4] However, before television, his bio also states he “worked as an advertising copy writer/producer, during which time he invented ice cream flavors for Baskin-Robbins.”[5] What in the hell does inventing ice cream flavors for Baskin-Robbins have to do with reviewing movies? Nothing! Are we supposed to be impressed by that little tidbit about this “punny” reviewer of film? Ooohhh…I know. That means if I pull a Harry Lockhart and claim to have invented dice as a kid, someone will be impressed enough to hire me as a film critic? Yeah, I know. Enough with the sarcasm. Normally, I would apologize for being such a condescending smart-ass; but, then I heard the audio clip of Kevin Smith and Joel Siegel on the Opie and Anthony Show (http://www.viewaskew.com/news/jul06/1.html).... Oh, my…how do I put it in words? It would be an understatement to call it one of the most confusing pieces of audio I’ve ever heard. First, Siegel completely misunderstands the question when asked whether or not he thought his disruption was “professional” because he only seems to be interested in explaining why he was proud of himself for walking out of Clerks II. Eventually, Opie and Anthony have to stop down the interview and redefine the question before he finally gets it. Of course, at that point, Siegel refuses to give a straight answer, even though he promises to leave more quietly the next time he walks out of a film. Yet, in between all of his sidestepping, mental confusion, and flat-out denials, Siegel keeps reminding everyone how he thinks “Kevin Smith is a fine filmmaker.” Huh? The moustache’s credibility sinks even further when Opie and Anthony ask Siegel if he wrote the “punny” headlines for the reviews on his website. First the old coot tries to “pshaw” the question all together before just flat out denying that he even has a website. Uh, Joel…do you need to borrow my old psychology textbook and look up the meaning of the word ‘denial?’ Now, here’s the real kicker…Siegel spends the first half of the interview (approximately 8 minutes) arguing with Kevin Smith, and doesn’t even realize he is actually talking to Kevin Smith. Good Lord! Is it time to retire the moustache Joel? Is the Alzheimer’s kicking in? Have you bought that one-way ticket to the land of dementia? On second thought, don’t answer…you’d probably just give us another really bad pun and then claim you don’t even know what puns are.
But seriously, is it time for Joel Siegel to hang it up? Like anything else, it depends on how you look at the situation. Most of today’s popular film critics are over the age of 50 (i.e. Joel Siegel, Roger Ebert, Andrew Sarris, Joe Morgenstern, Richard Schickel, etc.). To what extent does their age affect their reviews? Do their opinions accurately reflect the opinions of the average 18-35 year old audience member? Not really.		Photo by Jeff Vespa, WireImage.com
What happens when we start throwing race and gender into the mix? Are those audiences accurately represented? Take a look at American film critics in general. How many are female? How many are of an ethnicity other than Caucasian? The age of the TV film critic represents the age of their show’s target demographic, not the movie audience, which is why the 63 year old Joel Siegel has managed to keep his annoying puns afloat on “Good Morning America” for so many years. Look at his audience…it’s mostly bored housewives and senior citizens. Is it time for a critic overhaul? Maybe…maybe not. As long as the classical Hollywood narrative continues to reflect the current dominant American ideology of white patriarchal capitalism, we will be stuck with geriatric white male film critics like Joel Siegel. However, if more of these critics start having senior moments at press screenings like Siegel did, then maybe it is time to get younger at that position. Unfortunately, replacing old critics with younger ones won’t completely solve the problem. Movie audiences today have basically reached the point where they are too fragmented to benefit from one overall review. Instead, most young movie goers are now turning to fan sites on the internet – if they even read movie reviews at all. But, can you really blame them? How well versed do you think these older critics are versed in the new sub-genre of movies based on video games? Obviously, video gamers have a much better insight into these movies. What did Kevin Smith’s fans think of Clerks II? Not surprisingly, they weren’t offended by the donkey show – the film received an 8 minute standing ovation at the Cannes Film Festival.[6] So, what was it about the donkey show that offended Joel Siegel so much that he had to get up and leave right in the middle of the movie? Ironically, the words of former film critic Pauline Kael best explain Siegel’s odd behavior: “As it is, people sit and watch movies that audiences walked out on thirty years ago. Like Lot's wife, we are tempted to take another look, attracted not by evil but by something that seems much more shameful -- our own innocence.”[7] She didn’t write those words about the Siegel incident. They were written years ago – Pauline Kael passed away in September of 2001. As usual, the old girl was way ahead of her time. I wonder what Pauline would have said about Siegel’s antics today? Something tells me she’d rather watch a donkey show than sit through one of Joel Siegel’s reviews on “Good Morning America.” Come to think of it, so would I.

© Kelly Bartley 2006 [1] http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,19534,00.html [2] http://www.viewaskew.com/news/jul06/1.html [3]http://www.roycecarlton.com/speakers/siegel.html [4] Ibid. [5] Ibid. [6] http://www.viewaskew.com/news/jul06/1.html [7] http://www.thinkexist.com/quotes/pauline_kael/