The maiden voyage of the “Features” section is an interview with Christopher Null, who, aside from having gothy-cool last name, is the founder and Grand High Poobah of filmcritic.com.   For over a decade Null and his associates have been rating, berating and enduring movies good and bad like a movie critic version of The A-Team (which makes him either Hannibal or Mr. T as far as I can figure).

  In a career that not only features the can-do success of filmcritic.com, Null has also is a published novelist, screenwriter and filmmaker.   Mr. Null graciously opted to take time out of his busy schedule to swap a couple e-mails with yours truly to talk shop, writing and why being a film critic isn't all wine and roses…

Joe Mammy : So, how did you get in the reviewing business?   I don't know many kids that say they want to be a movie critic when they grow up, although most adults seem to kind of envy the position.

Christopher Null : I just fell into it. It was 1995 and I was sick to death of hack critics like Joe Leydon (then at the Houston Post) who kept giving away the entire plot of the movie in their reviews. A friend of mine was starting a computer consulting business and I wanted to start publishing my reviews -- which I'd been writing for a local electronic news service since 1993 -- to a broader audience. Filmcritic.com was born right there and has been steadily growing ever since.  

Joe:   One thing I've appreciated about your site is the frank and often gleefully sarcastic tone that is used in reviewing films.   I know in my work it's both a selling point and Achilles heel--some people enjoy it for what it is and others seem to think that you're being malicious, mean-spirited, etc.   I've always contended it's as much a survival mechanism as anything.   What kind of things do you look for as being fodder for a good one-liner and where do you draw the line as being inappropriate?

CN: Yep, sarcasm is a tricky bitch, and sadly many people don't appreciate it.   I've got the hate mail to prove it.   But what the hell, if people can't take a joke, fuck 'em.   What's sacrosanct at filmcritic.com? Not much. I shy away from cracking wise on religious movies -- The Passion of the Christ and anything to do with the holocaust. I made a crack (innocent, I swear) about a vapid holocaust documentary, and the publicist called me to say it made the producer cry. Now that's where I draw the line. (Though, in retrospect, that producer must have had awfully thin skin.)

Joe:   Probably the ugliest review I've had to do lately was "The Passion of Christ."   I know from your "hate mail" section of the site that you're used to getting, shall we say, dissenting views on your work, but how do you handle something that is more of a cultural phenomenon--even before it's released?

CN: No different. Lord of the Rings, Kill Bill, Star Wars, they all get the same treatment as the lowliest independent movie: Honesty above all else. If I find a critic falling into sappy populist opinion and getting sucked into any kind of "phenomenon," they're fired, to quote Donald Trump.

Joe:   If you were the head of a tribunal for crimes against humanity, which films, actors, directors, etc, would you have killed for cinematic horrors?

CN: Too many to list. At some point I would have offed everyone from Pauly Shore to John Sayles (my review of his vapid Limbo got me banned from Sony screenings for six months). But I try not to hold a grudge: Sayles has done good work since then, and I'm better for seeing it.   Atom Egoyan is one of my favorite directors but Ararat was just plain idiotic. That said, I'm pretty sure the world could do without Sandra Bullock, Vin Diesel, and any Pokemon movie, going forward.

Joe:   What do you see as the most baffling trend in films (or media in general, for that matter)? 

CN: Bad actors (The Rock, Ashton Kutcher) taking leading roles.

Joe:   Now, after being baffled, what do you see as the most unfortunate trend?   Or put another way, where do you see progress and innovation being lost instead of just ignored?

CN: Musicians-cum-movie stars. Why does every new action movie have a rap star in it? And why is he always the best thing in the movie!? Maybe this is the most baffling and the former issue is most unfortunate.

Joe: I see from your biography that you are also a writer.   What kind of topics, themes, situations interest you?   In other words, what part of an idea hits you and says, "I'll make a good story?"

CN: Hard to say... there's a "magic" in stories that is impossible to bottle, as cliched as that sounds. In general I like stories where the little guy sticks it to the system or the erstwhile hero, but I've written thrillers, romantic comedies, dramas, and more -- everything from novels to screenplays to nonfiction. A strong central character is central, of course, but his journey is impossible to separate from the character.

Joe:   What's the most frustrating thing about what you do?

CN: I tell ya, the hardest part is sitting in the theater for 30 minutes before the movie starts and having to put up with all the people who won tickets on the radio and think they are somehow entitled to sit in the press section. If publicists stopped giving away so many freaking tickets this wouldn't be a problem.

That said, if the movie didn't usually suck ass, that would be a HUGE help, too.

Joe:   If you had to describe what being a writer and critic is like, what would you tell someone?

CN: Note to aspiring critics: If you think you are going to enjoy a pleasant and insanely lucrative hobby as a writer and/or film critic because it lookss sooooo easy and you got A's in high school English, please kill that dream right now. We get about 100 applications per year from wannabe critics and typically only take on 1 or 2 new writers during that time.

Joe:   What about your work are you proudest about?

CN: Probably my novel, which got amazing reviews and quickly went out of print (but [shameless plug alert] I have a handful of copies now available at sutropress.com). The magazine I launched this year, Mobile PC, has been extremely gratifying as well and has received tremendous reader response.   In general, though, writing is unfortunately very thankless. Most people only write in when you've offended them, even though they've typically paid nothing for the material. Rarely is it coherent, which makes it all the more baffling. I stopped responding to most of my mail years ago.