Do you read film reviews before or after you see a film? Or not at all? How does the film critic influence your interpretation of the film? Personally, I read reviews after I have seen the film, to validate my likes, dislikes and interpretations. And if I am at odds with the critic, I simply assume my opinion to be of superior, concluding that the critic "simply did not get it", or clearly missed out on some of the vital nuances! As another chapter of Sundance closes and we settle into the humdrums of daily life, I muse upon one of the panels attended about the importance of film critics, especially in the age of web 2.0.

One of the most boisterous members of the panel was Owen Gleiberman, film critic at Entertainment Weekly. He argued passionately that amongst film critics, there has emerged a certain group thinking and a certain duty of exalting average films, mainly due to pressure from editors to succumb to unanimity of opinion. He rightly asks, "Where is the voice of dissent and the diversity of opinion?” For, the greatest danger of group thinking is when the internet acts as an aggregator of all these voices (such as on rottentomatoes.com where films are merely reduced to percentages), and individual voices of non-dissent become a colossal voice of non-dissent.

Mark Bell, the editor-in-chief of filmthreat.com offered a more positive outlook and asserted that the internet has a powerful role in providing voice to diversity of opinions. Individual bloggers for example have sparked amazing conversations, whereby the starting content itself has become less important than the conversation which ensues.

Another subject touched upon was the "popcornisation" of film (ah, a very telling noun!). Our boisterous panelist Owen Gleiberman made an ever great point about the proliferation and rising popularity of less than average films, films that make no sense, films utterly lacking in human dimensions. What is it that makes society watch these films? Are we so tired that we simply want to tune out and watch just anything, despite critical review? In the words of Owen, culture needs art. Mass culture needs mass art. Films are the art form of the modern era. The question is not so much if films have become so trivial that film critics do not matter. The far greater problem is if films stop mattering, then it is inconsequential that critics do not matter. For then, films would be a vanishing art.

Yet, at the end of the panel, we all took heart. Creativity, inspiration, imagination, new voices, new visions abound all around us. We merely have to seek alternative channels. Sundance, for example, stands against this popcornisation. Similarly, HP-Youtube's international film competition Project Direct is another example of user-generated creative inspiration. Imagine - a famous screen writer in her own country, the winner of the contest Adriana Falcão, was little known outside of Brazil. But with the power of web 2.0, she was able to share with the world her artistic vision and creativity with her winning film. Indeed, many stories wait to be told by new voices out there …