As someone who loves movies, I find the strange silence surrounding Am I Racist?, Matt Walsh's latest documentary, both intriguing and concerning. While this film has become a surprise box-office hit, drawing in $4.8 million from 1,517 theaters during its opening weekend, many major film critics have chosen not to review it. This is despite the fact that it's the highest-grossing documentary debut of the year. So why is this happening, and what does it say about the state of film criticism?
For context, Am I Racist? was produced by conservative media outlet The Daily Wire, and follows Walsh as he poses as an awkward DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) trainee. Think Borat, but aimed directly at the culture of diversity training in modern workplaces. The film's blend of satire and undercover footage is intended to question the effectiveness of DEI initiatives. Predictably, it has sparked heated reactions on both sides of the political spectrum.
What's particularly interesting, though, is the near-total blackout from established critics. Major outlets like The New York Times, Variety, and The Hollywood Reporter have all opted out of reviewing the film, leaving its Metacritic page barren and Rotten Tomatoes showing only seven professional reviews—all positive. This is a stark contrast to the film's audience score, which currently stands at 99% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, with a rare “A” CinemaScore from viewers. Clearly, the audience is seeing something the critics aren't—or are they just staying quiet?
This is eerily reminiscent of last year's Sound of Freedom, another politically charged film that went largely ignored by critics during its initial run, only to later receive reviews when it became too big to ignore. The strategy seems clear: ignoring a film can be a way of depriving it of legitimacy in the critical sphere, especially when it comes from a controversial source. However, with Am I Racist?'s commercial success, it's clear that audiences are interested, regardless of critical opinion.
But shouldn't art, regardless of its political bent, be critiqued? The role of a film critic isn't to promote or suppress a movie, but to engage with it. Ignoring Am I Racist? does a disservice to both the film's fans and its detractors. Whether or not you agree with the message, it's clear that Walsh's film has tapped into something worthy of discussion.
Beyond the controversy, one must wonder: what does this critical boycott mean for the future of movies that challenge mainstream narratives? Are we heading towards a future where only politically “safe” films get reviewed? For now, Am I Racist? remains a cultural flashpoint—adored by audiences, ignored by critics, and begging for someone to start a conversation. Isn't that what art is all about?
Here is what I take away from the corporate critics being silent, yet the audience score being 99% and the film making copious amounts of money. Professional entertainment critics are useless and should just find a new line of work.