Jonathan Romney
Jonathan Romney is a critic based in London. He writes for The Observer, the Financial Times, Sight & Sound, Screen Daily and Film Comment; he is visiting lecturer at the National Film and Television School and programme advisor on French cinema for the BFI London Film Festival. His books include Atom Egoyan (BFI) and a collection of criticism, Short Orders (Serpent’s Tail). His short films as writer-director are L’Assenza, A Social Call and man goes to the doctor and the doctor says…, and he is the co-writer of Fiona Tan’s 2016 feature film History’s Future.
Outlets: Sight & Sound, The Observer, Financial Times, Screen Daily, Film Comment
Location: London
Movie location I call home: Windblown Nantes as seen in Jacques Demy’s Lola (rather than in reality; it wasn’t thrilling when I went there, and neither was the other magical Demy location, Rochefort). Portugal, as seen in assorted films by Manoel de Oliveira, Joao Cesar Monteiro, Raúl Ruiz et al. (by contrast, the real Portugal is always magical).
What was the film or experience that made you want to write about the screen?
Living in Paris in 1983–84 and immersing myself in moviegoing – starting with Raul Rúiz’s Three Crowns of the Sailor, which was like a passage to an unknown continent of cinema.
What do you think are the major issues facing contemporary film criticism?
There’s always the worry that film criticism has ceased to matter – to the industry, to the media, to readers – as well as the fact that emerging critics have to struggle to be read and taken notice of in an increasingly busy field. The culture of the hot take has made a lot of critics feel that they need to stick their necks out to be listened to, and there’s always the temptation to opt for one of two extremes – either enthuse wildly, essentially as a fan, or look for a film’s iniquities to call-out. The measured, chin-stroking response may always not seem as exciting, but if the writing is personal and distinctive, these are often the reviews you want to read again.
How can film criticism stay vital in 2024?
The rise of fan culture – both in the mainstream and in the realm of cinephilia – has led to a specialisation that can sometimes feel arid and inward-looking. As well as looking to the sociopolitical narrative of our troubling times (which a lot of film criticism is doing, to compelling effect), we need to cast our cultural nets wider and see film as part of a larger galaxy of forms: literature, art, theatre, music. Filmmakers do this, otherwise they couldn’t make films, but critics don’t always follow suit.
What’s one piece of advice that you'd give an emerging critic today?
Be sceptical – about the films you watch, and about your own enthusiasms. It’s easy to get carried away by your expectations, by what you want a film to be – so be prepared to stand back and assess your own thinking habits. (Also: remember, it’s sometimes okay to fall asleep in a film.)
Who’s a critic that has inspired you?
Judith Williamson (her book Deadline at Dawn deserves to be much more widely known), David Thomson, Gilbert Adair, Serge Daney, Jonathan Rosenbaum.
Who’s a critic that everyone should be reading right now?
Stephanie Zacharek, Richard Brody, Justin Chang, Finn Halligan, Jessica Kiang, Guy Lodge
What’s the best thing you’ve seen this year so far?
Sasquatch Sunset, Grand Tour, All We Imagine as Light
What’s your MIFF 2024 theme music?
The soundtrack from Scorsese’s Casino: it has everything (Louis Prima, Clarence Frogman Henry, ‘Camille’s Theme’ from Le Mépris, what else do you need?)