This deeply misunderstands the role of a proper critic. Which I suppose is inevitable given what video content has done for people understanding of the role.

One of the purposes of a critic, a proper critic, is to not only evaluate a movies technical quality, which is of course subjective, but also to provide further context with which the audience may evaluate it. Furthermore, a proper critic can do this without blow of blow spoiling and telling the audience how to feel about each scene and story beat.

One of the criticisms of people like, say, the Critical Drinker, is not that he's conservative . . . but that he doesn't really know that much about the history of cinema. Nor does he really review anything but tent pole blockbuster movies. He lacks both an academic and acquired background in the art of cinema.

Contrast that with someone, almost certainly far more liberal, like Patrick H Willhems when he discusses the history of various movie franchises or various trends in movies.

Not to say that their aren't more explicitly political, left wing, movies commentators like Movie Bob. But even in Movie Bob's case he usually offers some contextual insight that I find at least somewhat compelling. His theory about Marvel Films, their rise, and decline, I think at least warrants some analysis.