Meet a Critic: Pete Hammond
The household name talks splitting from Maxim, reviewing films, and invoking the ire of others.
If you've ever read a movie advertisement, you've likely seen his name. Pete Hammond, Maxim magazine's lone film reviewer, is a ubiquitous force in entertainment media. See what makes the critic certain other critics love to hate tick in the latest edition of Meet a Critic.
Pete Hammond is a veteran in the movie journalism community; having worked in television, print, and online, he's got 15 solid years of film reviewing under his belt. When he signed on as Maxim magazine's primo pundit three years ago, Hammond became a household name -- quite a feat for any film critic, in this post-Pauline Kael day and age -- thanks largely to his oft-scrutinized tendency to be quoted on movie ads and commercials.
But Hammond is quick to defend his reputation from the acute scorn of Hollywood Bitchslap and other detractors; according to him, he's not a quote whore, just a lover of movies. And whether you choose to agree or agree to disagree with his rationale, Hammond is an open book about the public end of his tenure at Maxim (see below for more on the split, in his own words).
What did Hammond do before he became inextricably linked with Maxim magazine? What does it take for him to like (or dislike) a movie? And who, if not he himself, should be held responsible for recommending bad movies to the American public?
There's a lot to digest in this week's Meet a Critic, so dive right in and get to know Pete Hammond.
Name: Pete Hammond
Age: Old enough to get into R-Rated movies without a parent or guardian.
Hometown: Santa Monica, Calif.
Years reviewing film: 15ish
Why and how did you become a critic?
Pete Hammond: I have an eclectic career but always related to film in one way or another. Since I was 6 years old I have been obsessed, OBSESSED with movies and have worked in various jobs related to bringing movies to the attention of the public including as a producer on shows like Entertainment Tonight, Arsenio, Extra, Access Hollywood and the AMC movie network. While at ET I started working with my pal Leonard Maltin reviewing movies for his annual Movie Guide where I am still a Contributing Editor. About three years ago circumstance made me become Maxim's first (and only) full time national critic.
Fill in the blank: "If I wasn't a professional film critic, I'd be:
PH: A guy who didn't have to sit through Fantastic Four sequels.
What is your favorite film?
PH: Too many. Always loved Stanley Donen's Two For The Road though. Favorite film this year is Diving Bell And The Butterfly and Ratatouille.
Who is your favorite director?
PH: Francois Truffaut, Billy Wilder.
What's the worst movie you've ever seen?
PH: Too many to name. I always hope for the best though. Maybe The Assasination Of Trotsky with Richard Burton. Excruciating. Worst this year was that Lindsay Lohan horror thing they didn't show to critics (I go see everything eventually anyway).
Who do you think is a shoo-in come Oscar night?
PH: Ratatouille for animation. Lead pipe cinch.
Which was the most interesting film of 2007?
PH: Again, Diving Bell And The Butterfly -- a remarkable story, a remarkable film.
How did you originally end up at Maxim, and can you talk about what really happened when you left recently?
PH: They were looking for a critic and a friend who works with them mentioned me. After about eight months we finally came together when I told them I could get around the magazine's three month lead time by posting most of my reviews day and date in the magazine's online edition.
Unfortunately the magazine was sold in 2007 and a new group took over. The new editor has decided to deep-six reviews in favor of other types of film coverage. When this editor became editor of Playboy in 2002 he did the same thing to Leonard Maltin's reviews there. Guess he just doesn't like us critics. I had a freelance writer agreement so basically the gig just ended. It was all good. I thank them for the opportunity and will look for others in addition to my current stuff including my awards season work for the Los Angeles Times/The Envelope.com.
Are you aware of websites that document and analyze your quotes? How do you respond to such scrutiny?
PH: I am aware, but I don't respond. It's low rent stuff. Someone once sent me this thing called "Hollywood Bitchslap" or something and said they were hatin' on me. I thought with that name it sounded like a gay website devoted to Joan Crawford so I was a bit surprised. I later found out it was some pseudo local radio reviewer in Chicago who is obsessed with people who get quoted a lot (obviously HE doesn't so guess that makes him mad). [Editor's note: film critic Erik Childress runs Hollywood Bitchslap.] He doesn't appear to care for most critics -- or even movies -- for that matter. Anyway it was this endless diatribe against me written in tiny type. The guy needs an editor, that's for sure. He's not from the 'Windy City' for nothing. Anyway there are others too. I once googled myself and discovered a few but if I read them I will just get upset. You see, I always thought I was a nice guy and I am dependent on "the kindness of strangers." If you know the dude in Chicago tell him to lay off and get a life before he wastes his own being so angry.
|
Bardego writes: on Jan 22 2008 05:43 PM Speaking of critics, if any of you guys have Lou Lumenick on you "Favorite Critics" que, you might want to consider taking him off. He wrote a very snide and insensitive post today about Heath Ledger's death basically saying that he deserved it and had it coming. It was so nasty and mean-spirited that I've decided never to read anything from him again. (Reply to this) |
|
CoUcH ToMaToE DoUgIe writes: on Jan 22 2008 06:05 PM he did, thats unbelievable, i have always loved lou's reviews but if thats true then i have lost all respect for him. oh, and great interview with pete, though. (Reply to this) |
|
eddieb writes: on Jan 22 2008 06:09 PM Does anyone know what he ment by: "I go into every screening room with an optimistic and hopeful attitude. Not all critics do. I could name a few but I will leave the negative vibes to that guy in Chicago." Who was he talking about? (Reply to this) |
|
Jen Yamato writes: on Jan 22 2008 06:33 PM I'll have to check out what Lou said. The Heath Ledger news was terrible and so unexpected. Not to detract from the seriousness of that, but thanks for reading the Hammond piece, guys. Hope you liked this and other Meet a Critics. (Reply to this) |
|
moviegoer101 writes: on Jan 22 2008 07:17 PM can i ask you guys a question? how is it unexpected that someone in and out of rehab died? thats like saying omg!!! brittany spears oded???? lets get real (Reply to this) |
|
moviegoer101 writes: on Jan 22 2008 07:18 PM can i ask you guys a question? how is it unexpected that someone in and out of rehab died? thats like saying omg!!! brittany spears oded???? lets get real (Reply to this) |
|
moviegoer101 writes: on Jan 22 2008 07:18 PM this guys favorite film was the cartoon with the rat?? lol how the **** did u get a job at maxim (Reply to this) |
|
Blank Frank writes: on Jan 22 2008 09:59 PM I somehow doubt he got a bigtime job at a major magazine simply by being some nice ol' teddy bear living in a kind, gentle world of unicorns and sparkly faeries. Maybe it's Pete Travers Syndrome: the powers-that-be prefer quotability to in-depth analysis, so most movies are lavished with praise, which gives Maxim more exposure when they get their name and a quote stamped on every other movie preview. What, exactly, would distinguish him from a random quote generator that called every comedy a "must-see, hysterical, hilarious laugh riot from start to finish" and claimed that every action/thriller will have my hair on end, my butt on the edge of the seat, and make my pulse pound, my liver shiver, my knees sneeze, and my heart fart? I want someone to explain why this is worth my time and $10, not some softball praise just because somebody else enjoys getting paid to sit in the dark and munch on popcorn. (Reply to this) |
|
Rock_The_Luau writes: on Jan 22 2008 10:47 PM Ah, keyboard-jockeys. Here's a simple explanation: the guy's not a snob. That's not to say being a snob is bad thing; hell, I'M a snob, and proud of it. But the majority of filmgoers aren't looking for the next huge thing and simply will not tolerate any substitutes. They find something enjoyable in everything, as does he. Again, I'm not one of th people who will find merit or redemption in "The Heartbreak Kid", but some will. People are different. Also, Ratatouille was awesome, moviegoer101, and I think many, both snobs and casual viewers, will agree with me here. (Reply to this) |
|
vaodsi writes: on Jan 22 2008 11:27 PM Ledger died of an accidental sleeping pill overdose. i remmeber while filming dark knight, he was talking about only getting an hour of sleep from two ambiens. He's had some severe trouble sleeping for a while. No illegal drugs were found in the apartment. the sleeping pill bottle was NOT empty. It wasn't suicide and it wasn't a "LET's GET HIGH" OVERDOSE. anyway, i like this whole meet a critic thing. (Reply to this) |
|
John Z. Delorean writes: on Jan 23 2008 06:47 AM This guy is horrible. Payola like that clown from ain't it cool news and the larry the lizard king. His quotes are on every movie poster. I'm always wary of guys that love everything. I subscribe to Maxim and skim his "reviews" and believe me you have to take his children hostage to get him to say something negative about a movie. I even think he liked the silver surfer movie if I remember and now he sh*ts on it. Please. (Reply to this) |
|
iakobos writes: on Jan 23 2008 07:35 AM Delorean here's his review of Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer as quoted on RT. Rotten 2/5 "Sure, the CGI work is all pro and the Silver Surfer effect is a cool visual but the dumb lines and forced chemistry just don't cut it." You need to get your facts right if you are going to have credibility. (Reply to this) |
|
Runawayrunaway! writes: on Jan 23 2008 07:35 AM Hack. He makes Peter "slambang crackerjack thrill ride of the season" Travers look nuanced. (Reply to this) |
|
LordVapor writes: on Jan 23 2008 08:21 AM Like the article. Never really knew a whole lot about that guy, and I was reading his reviews in Maxim lol. If its true about the guy with the Ledger comments, then for sure on a boycott. It's not about whether he "deserved it" the man is gone, Artist aside, he left behind friends and family and was in the prime of his LIFE, let alone his career. Sigh, dont want my Heath comments to stray away from the appointed thread... This was a good article though, going to have to read more meet the critics articles. (Reply to this) |
|
eddieb writes: on Jan 23 2008 09:45 AM Does anyone know what he ment by: "I go into every screening room with an optimistic and hopeful attitude. Not all critics do. I could name a few but I will leave the negative vibes to that guy in Chicago." Who was he talking about? (Reply to this) |
|
dahluzz writes: on Jan 23 2008 10:06 AM Hammond came off as down-to-earth and straight forward. my issue lies with expectations. he criticizes other reviewers for going into a film expecting it to disappoint or underachieve. however, he goes in giving the film the benefit of the doubt and assuming it will be good and will have to work hard to disappoint him. i think both schools of thought are flawed. while i tend to research movies before i see them, i walk into the theater with an open mind and very few expectations one way or another. the movie has to earn my respect through the things it does right, not just avoid pissing me off. Plus, if you go in with few preconceived notions about the picture, you're not only able to be more objective, but you also increase your chances of being pleasantly suprised by the movie. I appreciate this interview, as it really humanized Hammond beyond seeing his name printed under so many positive adjectives, but I still can't take his reviews seriously. Maybe that will change once "Maxin" stops appearing next to that name. (Reply to this) |
|
dahluzz writes: on Jan 23 2008 10:06 AM In reply to this comment (#1512549) he was talking about that erik childress guy from hollywood bitchslap. did you read the first page? (Reply to this) |
|
Alex Vo writes: on Jan 23 2008 10:13 AM In reply to this comment (#1512549) He's talking about Erik Childress at Hollywood http (Reply to this) |
|
rt_hire_me writes: on Jan 23 2008 01:58 PM In reply to this comment (#1510988) Very interesting. Didn't make my heart fart like Blank Frank, but interesting. Does anyone know of a credible list of critics who are bonafide liars paid for positive reviews? I think Hammond is sincere. He does seem to do some backpedalling though. Stick by your reviews, man. (Reply to this) |
|
Erik Childress writes: on Jan 23 2008 02:02 PM (Reply to this) |
| You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register. |








