In her article, Helena Lindblad rebuts a critical review of the upcoming film 'Doktor Glas' by Aftonbladet's Jack Hildén, who expresses disdain for the film despite never having seen it. Lindblad points out that Hildén's judgments are based solely on the trailer and superficial elements such as the looks of the male leads, which she believes undermines a thoughtful appraisal of the film's relevance and depth. She criticizes this approach as indicative of a wider ignorance about Swedish cinema, especially when compared to neighboring countries.

Lindblad further emphasizes that this kind of criticism reflects a shallow engagement with cinema, where appearance and social media influence overshadow artistic merit. The reference to Tiktok promotions also indicates a generational conflict in how films are marketed and perceived today, raising questions about the criteria for evaluating art in the modern age. She argues that cinematic excellence should be judged on substance rather than surface-level impressions.

Moreover, by dismissing a film based on preconceptions and visual assumptions, critics risk overlooking the cultural significance and narrative depth that films like 'Doktor Glas' may offer. Lindblad's commentary serves as a call for more informed discourse around Swedish films, advocating for deeper engagement with the medium and broader appreciation beyond mere aesthetic considerations.