it's fucking stupid louis
read the one he links to (and completely misreads)
― history mayne, Thursday, 8 April 2010 16:33 (fourteen years ago) link
where?
― lllljjjj (acoleuthic), Thursday, 8 April 2010 16:42 (fourteen years ago) link
the ayo scott 1 from the new york times
― history mayne, Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:00 (fourteen years ago) link
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/movies/04scott.html?ref=movies
ok but lol AO Scott has this as an early gambit: the surviving full-time classical music, dance and even literary critics might have trouble filling out a bridge game
right, onto the meat of the article...
And that kind of provocation, that spur to further discourse, is all criticism has ever been. It is not a profession and does not stand or fall with any particular business model. Criticism is a habit of mind, a discipline of writing, a way of life — a commitment to the independent, open-ended exploration of works of art in relation to one another and the world around them. As such, it is always apt to be misunderstood, undervalued and at odds with itself. Artists will complain, fans will tune out, but the arguments will never end.
this is a good point. bergan's article seems slightly predicated on the idea that film criticism is undergoing death + rebirth, rather than slow evolution.
However, he doesn't recognise that the only ones who mourn this situation are film reviewers like himself. The general punter doesn't give a toss.
scott isn't even mourning! hence I can see that bergan is creating something of a strawman to argue against - but the overall impression I get is that the two men are in accord, albeit that bergan is encouraging a strain of rigour in the 'spur to further discourse'
― lllljjjj (acoleuthic), Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:09 (fourteen years ago) link
bergan is just a dick, scott is one of the best working critics, end of tbrr
― history mayne, Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:11 (fourteen years ago) link
by rigour I do sorta mean 'snobbery' haha
but if it's snobbery that says 'NO' to giving clash of the titans three comfortable stars when it's clearly a 0.5/10 movie then I am all for that tbh
scott's article is better-written and more well-rounded/open-minded than bergan's - granted
― lllljjjj (acoleuthic), Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:14 (fourteen years ago) link
"but if it's snobbery that says 'NO' to giving clash of the titans three comfortable stars when it's clearly a 0.5/10 movie then I am all for that tbh"
well... points systems/stars are a sign of this civilization's impending collapse really
you can't prejudge this shit n e way
― history mayne, Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:15 (fourteen years ago) link
wtf this thread is 1,000+ posts?!
― queen frostine (Eric H.), Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:16 (fourteen years ago) link
over about 1/12 of the history of the cinema if my maths is right, so
― history mayne, Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:19 (fourteen years ago) link
Film criticism has been dying longer than it's been living if my maths checks out.
― queen frostine (Eric H.), Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:21 (fourteen years ago) link
I am completely OK with points systems, but wish they didn't hold such sway over the actual criticism - this is why ILX threads on movies, no matter how simple or unconsidered the sentiments therein, are often much, much more valuable bellwethers of a movie's quality than a cavalcade of reviews - they're NOT processed, slicked-down, hermetic arguments, they're a barrage of minute pointers which frequently give a more skeletal impression of the movie for one to drape one's own taste upon. ILX has better close-readings (in miniature) than most film reviews I've seen
― lllljjjj (acoleuthic), Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:21 (fourteen years ago) link
a high standard
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 8 April 2010 17:24 (fourteen years ago) link
http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/stephanie_zacharek/index.html?story=/ent/movies/stephanie_zacharek/2010/04/08/farewell
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 10 April 2010 15:31 (fourteen years ago) link
xpost:
(I make a distinction between film reviewing and film criticism, which is a more scholarly and academic pursuit. Unlike film reviews, film criticism is more concerned with form rather than content.)
Ugh.
― Pete Scholtes, Saturday, 10 April 2010 22:50 (fourteen years ago) link
Criticism is just explaining (to yourself, to your friends, to the public) why you like or don't like something. Reviewing is a form of criticism. There is no reviewing that is not criticism. This is a phony "rap"/"hip hop" binary.
― Pete Scholtes, Saturday, 10 April 2010 23:10 (fourteen years ago) link
Mmm, not sure about that. Some of the best criticism leaves me wondering (and sort of not caring) about whether or not the author even liked a movie or not.
― queen frostine (Eric H.), Saturday, 10 April 2010 23:30 (fourteen years ago) link
I always thought Stanley Kauffmann had a short, simple, and unpretentious distinction between film reviewing and film criticism (I think it was him--maybe he was quoting someone else): film reviewing assumes you haven't seen the film in question, film criticism assumes you have.
― clemenza, Sunday, 11 April 2010 00:37 (fourteen years ago) link
Manny Farber said "whether you LIKED it is the last thing I care about."
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 11 April 2010 05:07 (fourteen years ago) link
(which admittedly is part of why I've never totally gotten Farber)
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 11 April 2010 05:08 (fourteen years ago) link
<3 vadim rizov <3
― Hey girl, what's up? Yo? What's up? What's up? What's up? (Tape Store), Wednesday, December 23, 2009 1:44 AM (3 months ago)
i can now say 'dope guy irl, too' :)
― all those electronic boom boom boom stuff (Tape Store), Sunday, 11 April 2010 05:22 (fourteen years ago) link
xpost I was thinking precisely of Farber after reading Eric's last comment. The Film Comment piece he wrote with Patricia Patterson on Taxi Driver makes it difficult to tell whether they dug it or not in any absolute sense. Certainly leaning towards "not. But the leaning is soooooooo so brilliant that the piece eclipses the film itself (which I'm no fan so caveat emptor and all that).
― Kevin John Bozelka, Sunday, 11 April 2010 05:27 (fourteen years ago) link
"not."
which I'm no fan OF
― Kevin John Bozelka, Sunday, 11 April 2010 05:28 (fourteen years ago) link
yeah the farbs is notorious for that
been dipping into dwight macdonald recently -- str8 up awesome
not shedding many a tear for steph z
― alpha zingdog (history mayne), Sunday, 11 April 2010 10:36 (fourteen years ago) link
yeah the farbs is notorious for thatAnd also for being able to coinlessly start an old kinetoscope viewer by striking it with his fist.
― A Century Of Elvin (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 11 April 2010 14:19 (fourteen years ago) link
well, Zacharek is not vanishing:
http://www.movieline.com/2010/04/welcome-stephanie-zacharek-movelines-new-chief-film-critic.php
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 14 April 2010 11:44 (fourteen years ago) link
been reading olden sarris articles via google news archive:
http://news.google.co.uk/newspapers?id=0tMQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=CYwDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6490,5674023&dq=new-york-film-bulletin&hl=en
― Big Fate (as Alvin 'Xzibit' Joiner) (history mayne), Wednesday, 14 April 2010 13:39 (fourteen years ago) link
lol a fictional nikke fink tv show: http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2010/04/12/diane-keaton-hbo-tilda/
― cupcake 24/7 (Tape Store), Wednesday, 14 April 2010 13:55 (fourteen years ago) link
this is good blogging: http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2010/04/times_critics_t.php
― Big Fate (as Alvin 'Xzibit' Joiner) (history mayne), Friday, 16 April 2010 11:46 (fourteen years ago) link
punishing panorama of pessimismHa!
― Blecch Generation (James Redd and the Blecchs), Friday, 16 April 2010 12:19 (fourteen years ago) link
Few filmmakers are as achingly earnest in their political views, and as deeply in touch with the soul of the proletariat, as Ken Loach is.
stephanie zacherak is terrible
― Greatest contributor: (history mayne), Tuesday, 11 May 2010 21:54 (fourteen years ago) link
yup
― is it really that hard to spot all these fake british dudes? (velko), Tuesday, 11 May 2010 21:56 (fourteen years ago) link
izzat bcz u think Loach is terrible?
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 12 May 2010 00:51 (fourteen years ago) link
that's a corny phrase, actually "soul of the proletariat" is an awful (and condescending to my ears) phrase. but loach is a really down-to-earth dude, a true progressive. who makes more-or-less dull films more often than not.
― by another name (amateurist), Wednesday, 12 May 2010 01:00 (fourteen years ago) link
I agree. And I'm not sure his movies are clear about who/what the "proletariat" are.
― cool and remote like dancing girls (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 12 May 2010 01:03 (fourteen years ago) link
p'haps cuz he's not all that doctrinaire
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 12 May 2010 02:04 (fourteen years ago) link
http://mubi.com/notebook/posts/2015
seems like a chill bro
never seen one of the films he's recommended, to my knowledge
would be sweet to be on the festival circuit
― j/k lol simmons (history mayne), Tuesday, 29 June 2010 13:24 (fourteen years ago) link
too many film reviews waffle on and on about the narrative. i really dont need to hear it broken down for that long. they should stick to REVIEWING rather than describing. which is why sight and sound has the right idea by separating the synopsis and review.
― titchy (titchyschneiderMk2), Tuesday, 29 June 2010 14:41 (fourteen years ago) link
There are ways to intertwine narrative recountings with criticism. Some of the best BFI monographs did it.
― rim this, fuck that (Eric H.), Tuesday, 29 June 2010 14:45 (fourteen years ago) link
André Bazin― Amateurist (amateurist), Monday, December 30, 2002 7:47 AM (7 years ago) Bookmark
this is a solid choice, but can the bazin fans out there read french?
i just read richard roud's review of 'what is cinema?' from 1968 and it is pretty astonishing how poor the translation was. and amazingly it's been unchanged ever since.
― I’ll put you in a f *ckin Weingarten you c*nt! (history mayne), Wednesday, 21 July 2010 10:29 (fourteen years ago) link
there are new translations for this book, no? i read it in both french and portuguese, never looked in english.
― moullet, Wednesday, 21 July 2010 12:20 (fourteen years ago) link
yeah some canadian firm has done it proper. but the widely disseminated uni of cali version is still the standard in anglophone countries.
― I’ll put you in a f *ckin Weingarten you c*nt! (history mayne), Wednesday, 21 July 2010 12:29 (fourteen years ago) link
it frightens me the lack of accuracy and care in a lot of these translations.
― moullet, Wednesday, 21 July 2010 12:47 (fourteen years ago) link
where did you read that review, nrq?
― zvookster, Wednesday, 21 July 2010 16:18 (fourteen years ago) link
sight and sound, spring 1968
can't c+p
― I’ll put you in a f *ckin Weingarten you c*nt! (history mayne), Wednesday, 21 July 2010 16:19 (fourteen years ago) link
ic thx!
― zvookster, Wednesday, 21 July 2010 16:35 (fourteen years ago) link
geoffrey howell-smith goes as far as to say the translation "may have done more harm than good" herehttp://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/polls/film_books_full.php (and also points out the canadian edition is only available in canada due to copyright) Ian Christie also points out it's a poor translation, and rosenbaum says there's no one good volume to recommend. but a lot of anglo critics there seem as ignorant of major problems as i was (i read volume ii & some anthologized stuff), and the french of course have no compunctions.
― zvookster, Wednesday, 21 July 2010 17:07 (fourteen years ago) link
Eberts looking for an Elvis Mitchell replacement
http://www.slashfilm.com/roger-eberts-movies-premieres-january-21-seeks-host/
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 21 December 2010 13:10 (thirteen years ago) link
Hit it, Morbs! Otherwise we're left with this:
However, the Chicago Sun-Times is now reporting that Mitchell has been dropped and they’re considering replacing him with “a young male in his mid-20s with little or no experience as a movie critic or as a TV talent.”
― Gus Van Sotosyn (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 21 December 2010 13:23 (thirteen years ago) link
I think I qualify.
― benanas foster (Eric H.), Tuesday, 21 December 2010 13:26 (thirteen years ago) link