 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Someone still paying attention to that clown? posted by Victor Khomenko on November 14, 2003 at 11:33:44:
I think that's generally right. He's really an enterainment critic first. He doesn't hold films up to consistent artistic standards, he judges them on their own terms: will this film's intended audience like it? That, of course, is pandering to panderers. It's honest, useful, and populist, I guess--in it's perpetuation of mediocrity-- but not really worthy of the title "film critic" IMO.What film critics, if any, do you like?
Follow Ups:
Anthiony Lane is my all time favorite.
I don't always agree with him and have come to feel that the quality of his reviews has fallen off a bit in recent years (they seem more rushed, his wit sometimes forced and flat), but as with all great critics, you read him for his peccadillos as much as for his insights. You may know he finally put out a collection of his New Yorker reviews and essays. I was disappointed that his review of the novel adapted from the film adapted from Dickens' Great Expectations wasn't included. And out of the multitude of usually ill-advised entries into the post-9/11-musings sweepstakes, his, I thought, was the most moving--that I read, at least.
I have the book you mention and have read most of it. The breadth of his knowlege (he's not that old) is astounding and his humor unbeatable. I a;ways look forward to his New Yorker pieces every other week.
I don't read any critics on any regular basis. I have plenty of people around me (some here) whose judgement I trust and if I want to see a new film I follow their recommendations. But in most cases it is even simpler - usually I know the director and actors, and that tells me what to expect. That system is working fine for me.
with Pauline Kael; the World Heavyweight Champion of film reviewers
She never pandered to an intended audience or anyone else; more often than not her reviews were more entertaining than the films themselves!
Eric
I recall reading an essay on Barry Lyndon some time back that referenced her exasperation at the narrator's always telling you what was going to happen before it happened, to which Sydney Pollack was quoted as saying "That's the fucking point, Pauline."
1. Kael called Barry Lyndon "the first coffee table movie.2. And she HATED The Shining.
I don't agree. But that's actually pretty funny. Redeemingly bad criticism.I'm increasingly ambivalent about the Shining. I've flipped from thinking it the most frightening film I've ever seen to being unable to view it as anything other than a comedy. Last time I saw it in the theater (special screening, Halloween), I and some dude on the other end of the theater were the only ones laughing--and he was probably getting evil looks from neighbors and elbows from his wife as well.
Kael hated 2001 as well, as I recall.
I continue to love The Shining and agree that it has its funny moments. Although between A Clockwork Orange and Eyes Wide Shut Kubrick issued all his fims in monaural sound I think the 5.1 tracks on the most recent DVD issues (weren't the first real botch jobs?) are successful. If you have a DVD or laserdisc copy of The Shining take a slow mo look at the tour given by Ullman when the Torrences first arrive and check out all the young women he's obvuously been involved with.As for 2001, I think most critics didn't care for it at first then slowly warmed up to the masterpiece that it is.
.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
