Say what you like about Mark Kermode’s opinions, you can never say the film critic doesn’t care.

He talks from the heart, gets wild with rage and relish, and spends his life in darkened rooms for long periods (often to see as many as seven movies a day) with other film freaks.

The dedication means things are going well for the bespectacled rockabilly fan. He celebrated his 50th birthday back in July and a few months later inherited Philip French’s treasured throne as chief film critic for The Observer.

Kermode and Simon Mayo’s long- running Film Review on Radio 5 Live has become a radio institution, as have its podcasts and film-streams on YouTube.

He contributes to film industry bible Sight & Sound, presents BBC Two arts magazine The Culture Show and is regularly called upon to offer opinions for The Review Show. Not only that, his band The Dodge Brothers have just released their third album.

Why, then, did a book titled Hatchet Job: Love Movies, Hate Critics – Kermode’s recent polemical plea for the public to recognise the venerable position of the professional film reviewer – land on The Guide’s desk two weeks ago?

“The print medium is dying,” he states baldly, speaking before a talk to flesh out the fineries of the argument at Brighton’s Duke Of York’s Picturehouse. “Everything is going from print to digital. So does that mean the end of film criticism?

“It seems to me there is a comparison to be made with what happened with cinema, going from 35mm to digital, and what is happening with journalism, which is going from print to digital.

“It doesn’t matter whether it is for print or internet or on radio or TV, what matters is that we take the craft seriously.”

Kermode’s previous long-form effort, The Good, The Bad and The Multiplex – another essay wrapped up in anecdotes and colourful tales from the coal-face – dealt with the idea that multiplexes were killing cinema.

He argued that by neglecting projectionists – what he calls “the, single most important group of people in cinema, remember that old phrase, ‘only projectionists get final cut’,” – were what mattered. The medium was not the point.

“The problem was to do with this multiplex culture which thought you could just farm films through a big faceless shed and nobody would care because they just wanted the film.

“When you look at the Duke Of York’s – and other great thriving independent cinemas – if cinema is going to survive it is because of people doing the job properly, offering a proper theatrical experience, and I have been proven right.”

But journalism, and arts journalism in particular, faces arguably deeper problems. Kermode mentions the plight of film critic Todd McCarthy, chopped by Variety magazine in 2010, and Jim Hoberman, “let go” by Village Voice in 2012, as examples of media proprietors deciding there is no value in criticism.

A few months after Kermode finished the book, The Independent on Sunday culled all its arts critics, which took effect as of September.

“It’s funny I finished the book on an upbeat note, saying look, I think it is OK, we are going to be all right, then that terrible thing happens. “As far as reflecting public opinion, I write for The Observer and it is a great bastion of taking criticism seriously.

“When I took over from Philip French he said it is the best chair in film criticism – partly because he made it the best chair in film criticism because he was/is the greatest film critic in the English language and nobody writes the way he does or has his knowledge and experience, but also because he was able to do that because he was writing for a paper which took arts journalism seriously.”

It may be the case that some publications decide they are not that interested in arts journalism. Other publications might go the other way. “Now is the time to put your marker in the ground and say we do think there is a point in proper criticism,” believes Kermode.

The same applies to the internet magazines and online newspaper sites. While the internet is a great democratic leveller because everyone has a voice and we can all share our bile and praise, what actually makes you go to watch a film? Is it a voice of experience giving sage advice, a rating on an aggregator site, such as Rotten Tomatoes, or a trailer on YouTube?

“There was an issue of Time Out the other day in which all the reviews were written by members of the public,” explains Kermode. “It was a one-off edition and it was an interesting idea but I can’t say it was one that had any traction for me.

“When I pick up Time Out I want to know what Dave Calhoun thinks; I want to know what somebody who has 15 years of experience thinks. That’s why I get Time Out. I want that voice of authority.”

The critic puts his job on the line, as well as his reputation, with every review. He must be honest, open and accurate. There is no anonymity. He must be professional, assess the film in its context, offer talking points, new ideas and entertainment.

“I’m not convinced in the end that anyone makes a decision about whether to go to see a film or not on the basis of what a critic says and, incidentally, they shouldn’t.

“Critics aren’t there to tell you what to see or what not to see, they are there to talk about cinema. They are there to do what [fictional detective] Kinderman wants to do in The Exorcist – to discuss, to critique, and to enjoy doing it.

“I’m serious, he is my touchstone character. He is the guy who all he wants to do is go to the cinema and talk about it afterwards. Just to have the conversation – and that is what I feel about it.”

  • Mark Kermode – Hatchet Job: Love Movies, Hate Critics, Duke Of York’s Picturehouse, Preston Circus, Brighton, Monday, October 7
  • Starts 8pm, SOLD OUT.