How Critical Are Critics to the Industry?

After it was revealed that overzealous Sony Pictures Entertainment staffers created a mythical film critic to laud such movies as “The Animal” and “The Hollow Man,” one immediate reaction was, “Why would they bother?”

Realistically, it’s hard to imagine hordes of discerning filmgoers rushing out to see Rob Schneider mimic a seal, or six degrees of Kevin Bacon’s innards, based on reviews. From that perspective, the whole misguided stunt felt almost encouraging, suggesting studio marketing departments still attach weight to what critics say--a point open to debate when most movies are designed for teenage boys, an audience unlikely to be swayed by Newsweek’s David Ansen or even which way Roger Ebert points his thumb.

In the wake of that sorry affair, television critics--who begin descending on Pasadena this week for their semiannual tour to preview upcoming programs--might justifiably feel a tad insulted. To the best of anyone’s knowledge, nobody has bothered to fabricate a TV critic lately, though there are executives convinced the Washington Post’s Tom Shales was dreamed up by a modern-day adherent of the Marquis de Sade.

Nevertheless, critics’ role as well as their relationship to the industry and audience have grown more complex--as new technology and the proliferation of channels simultaneously render the contribution of those who screen projects so you don’t have to either more important or more irrelevant, depending on one’s point of view.

Television criticism has historically been different from film. After all, moviegoers must leave the house and plunk down money, theoretically inspiring people to pay attention to reviews to make an informed choice. In television, the perception was reviews carried less influence since the public can sample shows and quickly flip away, the only cost being a few minutes of the viewer’s time.

Yet this dynamic has changed as the lines between film and television blur. Many people now wait to see theatrical movies for the first time on TV screens instead of within a local multiplex. In addition, TV reviews affect decisions with monetary significance, such as whether it’s worth $12 a month subscribing to HBO or Showtime--one reason pay channels go to unparalleled lengths (or depths, depending on one’s perspective) when schmoozing the press.

Of course, some network executives privately insist they don’t really care what critics say, which, like much of what comes out of their mouths, is only half true.

For a small but discriminating breed of viewers, press coverage provides another mechanism to help sift through the clutter of 70-odd channels. As a result, positive reviews give networks a tool in the scramble to hook viewers--especially as the emphasis of programming gradually evolves from a shotgun approach to attracting smaller, targeted, more affluent audiences.

At the same time, with so many options available, a portion of the audience assumes they can find something to watch just by idly grazing or with help from those handy on-screen program guides. To this contingent, investigating that night’s menu isn’t necessary so long as they possess a little time to kill and a functional thumb.

Moreover, obsession with the youth audience has filled TV screens and movie theaters with fare that is essentially critic-proof, constructed for those as apt to be swayed by splashy ads and Internet buzz as the opinions in major-market newspapers or national magazines. To that extent, programmers can dismiss negative coverage, which won’t scare off such viewers and, if anything, may intrigue them.

That said, television executives suffer from the human frailty of taking pride in kudos they earn and awards they win for programs such as “The West Wing” and “Everybody Loves Raymond”--notably, both shows graduated from being critical darlings to popular hits. Though it’s impossible to calculate the press’ role in that transformation, critics no doubt helped lure at least some viewers into the tent.

The networks’ own advertising also underscores the perceived value of such praise, to the point of fudging the truth. Two years before Sony conjured up David Manning, for example, NBC took a Shales review of “Providence” that said, “It’s as dreary and dismal and empty as ‘Trinity.’ Thus can it truly be said: ‘NBC has done it again,’ ” then crafted a misleading on-air promo that proclaimed, “ ‘NBC has done it again’--Washington Post.”

Of course, it’s one thing for critics and reporters to tell producers and executives that their baby is ugly and quite another to question their morality--or amorality--for bringing such offspring into the world, which could represent the combative next phase in this long-running serial.

Politicians lament excesses regarding sex and violence in the media, but it has largely fallen to critics to contemplate the propriety of series such as CBS’ “Big Brother” or NBC’s “Fear Factor.” And if TV executives act thin-skinned now, just wait until pans of their latest sitcom flop or nebulous complaints about “coarsening our culture” give way to accusations of complicity in someone’s death--an event that seems inevitable as the frantic pursuit of fickle young viewers spawns concepts meant to approximate the visceral rush of a head-on collision.

Networks have thus far turned a deaf ear to such cautionary analysis while still doing their best to court critics. Indeed, ABC is hoping visiting scribes can feel the love by offering them tickets to Disney’s “The Lion King” at the Pantages Theatre--proof that self-promotion and synergy remain key spokes in Hollywood’s big circle of life.

Nevertheless, garnering praise, and ignoring ridicule, will become more of a high-wire act as networks press further into uncharted waters. So to forestall the creation of another fictitious critic by some network marketing wizard, here are a few phrases from a real columnist (granted, you might get some argument there) in a real newspaper.

“Riveting!” “Brilliant!” “The best new show of the season!” “A sure-fire winner!” “You’ll never want to leave the couch!” “Better than the other junk in its time slot!” “Kids, sex and violence! Just don’t tell your parents!” “The perfect hour if you have nothing else to do!”

To fashion a promotional spot from these exclamations, simply mix in hot air and puffery, spinning as needed. It’s a formula networks will need to master if they continue along their current path, toward a day when finding a reputable real-life critic to applaud their shows might require not just a little creative sleight of hand, but true magic.

*

Brian Lowry’s column appears on Wednesdays. He can be reached by e-mail at brian.lowry@latimes.com.