When I was young I wanted to be an actor. When I was older I wanted to be a film critic then a filmmaker; director, screenwriter, cinematographer, editor. I went as far as thinking I wanted to be a theatre director and a playwright. As I’ve gotten older I’ve considered being a film programmer and now a film studies lecturer. With all of these career paths juggling in my head, I’ve come up with this conclusion. Being a film critic from a journalistic side often means that the reviewing is based on only what can be seen in the cinema, which can be quite limiting. Ideally a critic could also write about what films are not in wide distribution or indeed those that have little or no distribution to get them known. It could be a film from Taiwan, India or Burkina Faso. It doesn’t have to be a review of a film that a reader can get so many other opinions on. To aspire to create art in film criticism as Mark Cousins says, to write something that hasn’t been written about a film before, or indeed about a film that hasn’t been widely seen, to be as creative as possible. As I say it is an ideal way of film criticism.
Film programmers can have the dilemma of choosing films just because they showed at Cannes or Venice. As Adrian Martin points out there can sometimes be only three films from Australia and other countries that are selected by the world festival circuit that do the rounds. To teach film studies is the most ideal for me, to teach and write would be a dream. Surely there is nothing more rewarding than teaching film. You can teach those lesser known films, it’s part of education! Adrian Martin started teaching film studies in Melbourne at 20, Mark Cousins started programming films for the Edinburgh International Film Festival at 26. I’m 26 this year, I’d better get on it and not look back.