Film critic shares writing, career inspiration

By Jill Aho

The idea of being a film critic can be appealing to those who love movies. But for Shawn Levy, who has been reviewing movies for the Oregonian since 1997, it has been a passion for more than just movies. He has a passion for writing.

The English Department’s Noon Reading Series hosted Levy in the Visual Arts Theater Tuesday. Levy began by answering the most frequently asked questions for the more than 60 in attendance.

In any given year, Levy said, there are up to 600 films shown in Portland. Levy sees around 300 of those films. He said he chooses which movies he will miss and which ones will be covered by freelance writers. He made the distinction between “getting” to see the movies and “having” to see them.

“The job is not going to the movies. The job is writing on deadline, accurately, and if you’re lucky, well,” he said. The newspaper industry has been a major part of Levy’s life since his childhood in New York. He was influenced by columnists and was surrounded by media in his home, his parents subscribed to New York’s daily newspapers, which included an afternoon paper. He would also make it a point to pick up papers that his family didn’t subscribe to when he visited the city. He called those he admired “real New York tough guys.”

He wrote for newspapers while in school and admits he could have easily been a sportswriter if it hadn’t been for his passion for film. His first job writing for a professional publication paid him in restaurant coupons, but helped him build a portfolio that would later land him a paying job. He said his first paying position garnered $18,000 a year, and wasn’t enough to feed his family. “I had to take another job to feed my journalism habit,” he said.

Levy thinks the process of producing a newspaper is “grueling” and said with 52 A & E sections a year, “You run out of clever things to say pretty fast.”

The future of the newspaper industry is always a hot topic, with so much new media available, but Levy doesn’t seem to be worried. Newspapers are useful in more ways than one, and they are delivered to homes every day. He thinks that until the new media becomes as accessible as the newspaper, and as disposable, papers will not be overtaken. The newsroom itself seems to be the heart of what journalism. As Levy put it, “We are information gatherers, distillers and deliverers.”

Levy feels the value of a critic is that people can learn whose tastes to trust. He didn’t use the first person until he had been writing for the Oregonian for eight years, and feels that a level of trust had built up by then. He knows that many people think movie critics are simply expressing their opinion in their likes and dislikes, what they recommend versus what they give a bad review.

“That’s why I put my name on the top so you don’t mistake it for the word of God,” said Levy.

The criteria he uses to put values to movies are just one way to look at films. He identifies his criteria as the language and grammar of cinema.

One example he gave was his review of “The Horse Whisperer,” which he disliked. In his opinion it looked as though Robert Redford was on a planet where the sun shines in every direction, which he feels is just “bad cinematical grammar.”

For Levy, movie reviewing is not about popularity, making the comparison that just because McDonald’s is a popular restaurant, that doesn’t mean it’s excellent.

Although he has never had a death threat for one of his reviews, Levy said, “‘Brokeback Mountain’ is shaking some real animals out of the trees.”