I think that's fine too-- I have abandoned reviews in the past because there wasn't something "new" to say. Harder to do when someone's paying you for a commentary, but a lot of it (for me!) is simply digging until you find that hook that can help others see a film in a different/unexpected way.

It helps that I'm usually dealing with lesser known films though--this is not so easy with films that have been written about ad nauseum, unless you are somehow able to come up with a new context that hasn't been considered before. Here's another good example: letterboxd.com/paulcorupe/f...

... that people may not be aware of. eg - The Christmas Martian is a 70s Quebec kids film, but was also the start of the producer's personal (but doomed) vision to create giant child-focused art centres across the world to foster creativity. You would not get that from just watching the film.

Obviously good film writing must go beyond "should you see it" but today I think there is too much criticism written from the reviewer's personal perspective, which may be cathartic for an author but isn't always relatable. That's why I try to uncover that interesting context even on "bad" films...

Interesting - IMO, film writing should open up a film to be appreciated in new ways. In my commentaries, I research newspapers/magazine coverage at the time to broaden the context of why and how these films were made. What made the film significant at that time & what makes it worth your time today?

Thank you! & thanks for listening!!

Here's two: Kenny & Company (1976) & The Hollywood Knights (1980) - I can vouch for the first as worthwhile but haven't seen the second yet

To be honest the odds are not in my favor!

Phew

Hell yeah $9!

I thought you meant the flavours!

This is cultural appropriation

Me too-- I had a well-worn copy taped off CityTV Late Great Movies!

Tactful!

Director Bozidar Benedikt told me no longer had a copy of BROOKLYN NIGHTS personally, but there is a Russian overdub version kicking around that I've watched.