|
Post by Mattsby on Jan 14, 2022 3:26:50 GMT
www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/critic-is-a-four-letter-word?fbclid=IwAR2C-pmVXY_6w44vrhOagaZ3fuqfEeHGZ31OOYZeyNgvpXby3UUVifeBwsMInteresting piece by Ebert from '08, on the often-argued function of the critic. I've read so many of his reviews, and books-- Life Itself, A Kiss is Still a Kiss, Two Weeks in the Midday Sun, etc. But I still come across pieces like this that I've never read before. As for working critics, I check on LaSalle, Vikram Murthi, Jessica Kiang, and yes Armond White (his review for France is a stunner, despite disagreeing). Also I get a kick outta Fernando Croce, who's on Letterboxd.... his reviews make all sorts of other art connections, compact little reviews and they read like DH Lawrence poems.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on May 27, 2023 15:33:35 GMT
Armond White at his most "come on hit me, I dare you" on The Little Mermaid (2023) - saw this on Jeff Wells site but the whole review is a provocation ........ (in the link)........although "amphibious Scandanavian heroine" has a ring to it....... Everything is social engineering in the new live-action version of The Little Mermaid. It changes Hans Christian Andersen’s Danish fairy tale — a touchstone of Western culture — and revokes its preeminence, reworking its amphibious Scandinavian heroine’s image to resemble that of a biracial American teenager (Ariel, played by pop singer Halle Bailey) that suits contemporary, racialized politics.
This new version of The Little Mermaid reboots the unaccountably popular 1989 animated version to illustrate that Disney’s indoctrination credo is no longer only for entertainment. This is how Millennial industries teach stealth lessons on racial identity that also reject Western tradition.www.nationalreview.com/2023/05/the-little-mermaids-revoke-and-change-agenda/
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on May 27, 2023 16:23:37 GMT
Not mentioned yet..... idk the general opinion on him but ever since his spot-on Pig review I've kept an eye on him. K Austin Collins for Rolling Stone etc. His favorite film list includes Deathdream, A Brighter Summer Day, Mikey & Nicky, Nothing but a Man, The Hanging Tree, Abel's Body Snatchers, Seconds, Detour. The man has taste.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Dec 22, 2023 20:28:52 GMT
Two of the bigger, younger names in the critic biz... both somewhat or soon to be returning from other endeavors.... one wrote a movie (The Sweet East), one wrote a book..... Nick Pinkerton & K Austin Collins discussing film criticism... reverseshot.org/interviews/entry/3174/pinkerton_collins
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Dec 22, 2023 20:40:23 GMT
One of my fave critics - Mick LaSalle really disliked one of my fave films of 2023 - Poor Things - he liked it about at a countjohn level tbh .......here is LaSalle talking to ANOTHER critic who also didn't like it about "why" and why the critic can't and shouldn't be intimidated by the artist: Hi Mick: I’m an L.A.-based entertainment journalist and film critic. While I found a lot to admire (about “Poor Things”) in terms of its ambition and production values, I was ultimately turned off by what I felt was a seriously misguided take on female empowerment. After reading (and completely agreeing) with your review, at least I can take solace in that I’m not completely alone here.
Scott Mantz, Los Angeles
Hi Scott: This is a thing film critics do. If a director is established as a genuine artist — rightly so, in Yorgos Lanthimos’ case — the critics become intellectually intimidated and accept whatever the publicity and press releases are saying about the movie. It’s much easier than thinking through what’s wrong.
However, if a brilliant new filmmaker comes along and does something that critics don’t understand, they’ll assume they’re smarter than the filmmaker; they’ll assume that the filmmaker wasn’t trying to do something new but rather failing at doing something old, and they’ll be snide and condescending.
The truth about “Poor Things” is right in front of people, that this is the farthest thing from a feminist film. The movie is an exploitation, not only of Bella but of Emma Stone. The fact that Stone is being exploited willingly and may even win an Oscar for it doesn’t ameliorate the situation. It just makes it one more chapter in a very old story.datebook.sfchronicle.com/movies-tv/ask-mick-poor-things-chaplin-18546649
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Dec 23, 2023 17:34:59 GMT
He seems to be primarily objecting to all the sex which I didn't like either although I maybe could have lived with it had Bella been written (a lot) better. I went over it in the thread for the movie so I don't need to relitigate it here.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 31, 2024 18:17:26 GMT
Bill Simmons Podcast is fncking sub-mental ....3 sports bros talking films the way I would talk baking or some shit His show "The Rewatchables" should be renamed "The Unlistenable" .....the fact that there are people out there that listen to this and find Armond white not to be trusted at all (come on) is mindboggling ...... It blows.....
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jan 31, 2024 23:59:58 GMT
Bill Simmons Podcast is fncking sub-mental ....3 sports bros talking films the way I would talk baking or some shit His show "The Rewatchables" should be renamed "The Unlistenable" .....the fact that there are people out there that listen to this and find Armond white not to be trusted at all (come on) is mindboggling ...... It blows..... Eh, I think it’s an entertaining podcast, though not really meant to be “serious” film criticism, so I don’t approach it that way. It’s like listening to your friends at a bar talk movies – just light and funny at times, some interesting trivia shared, nothing really deep. I like Sean Fennessey, and the categories they do are fun (though some are kind of dumb I’ll admit).
|
|
|
Post by wallsofjericho on Mar 3, 2024 3:22:50 GMT
Bill Simmons Podcast is fncking sub-mental ....3 sports bros talking films the way I would talk baking or some shit His show "The Rewatchables" should be renamed "The Unlistenable" .....the fact that there are people out there that listen to this and find Armond white not to be trusted at all (come on) is mindboggling ...... It blows..... I actually don't mind Simmons in the sense that he doesn't take himself too seriously with his film opinions (his sport analogies do get tiresome sometimes). I do prefer him to someone like Sean Fennessey who seems to think he's knowledgable about films but resorts to the most basic choices (his predictable love for Scorsese and Tarantino).
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Mar 3, 2024 3:29:45 GMT
Most cinephiles like Scorsese and Tarantino. Not liking them is basic, pseudointellectual BS. "Wah Dickens and Jane Austen are popular!"
|
|
|
Post by wallsofjericho on Mar 3, 2024 3:32:00 GMT
Most cinephiles like Scorsese and Tarantino. Not liking them is basic, pseudointellectual BS. "Wah Dickens and Jane Austen are popular!" I know most like them but I do find his end of year choices predictable because most of the time they include those two names.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Mar 3, 2024 6:50:59 GMT
Bill Simmons Podcast is fncking sub-mental ....3 sports bros talking films the way I would talk baking or some shit His show "The Rewatchables" should be renamed "The Unlistenable" .....the fact that there are people out there that listen to this and find Armond white not to be trusted at all (come on) is mindboggling ...... It blows..... I actually don't mind Simmons in the sense that he doesn't take himself too seriously with his film opinions (his sport analogies do get tiresome sometimes). I do prefer him to someone like Sean Fennessey who seems to think he's knowledgable about films but resorts to the most basic choices (his predictable love for Scorsese and Tarantino). You know, I'm so old I sill prefer difficult "film critics" to regular "people who talk about movies / movie reviewers" - I've said this a lot on MAR but I would rather read Armond White because as much as White can be head-scratching (and he is A LOT ) he is the one who is more likely to make you see a movie an entirely different way.........you just never get that from Bill............I mean I know what I like and why I like it - I want someone to stimulate my thoughts about film rather than to placate them. I also think there's something about the written word that will always beat podcasts - for me - I know people irl that are more likely to stimulate more of my thoughts about movies (and sports actually) than Simmons..........I think there are people on MAR who are more likely to do it tbh
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Mar 3, 2024 6:58:38 GMT
Most cinephiles like Scorsese and Tarantino. Not liking them is basic, pseudointellectual BS. "Wah Dickens and Jane Austen are popular!"You have no way to know that anything - and I mean anything - criticism or an actual film itself - is psuedo-intellectual without looking at a specific piece of criticism (or a film) - I mean no one is obligated to like (or hate) anything - and the fact that they are paid for it doesn't change that principle......at all........ "Most cinephiles" ^
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,205
Likes: 1,591
|
Post by Nikan on Mar 3, 2024 7:48:04 GMT
I admire White. He's the closest to my idea of what a critic should be... Ebert on the other hand I've always found overrated. I've been meaning to elaborate on this comment of mine ever since I posted it but never found the will lmao... Ebert seemed like a buddy to Scorsese which I think is so weird... like, keep your distance and do your job. Leave the fawning over filmmakers to us!... White on the other hand writes like a blade... he begins his review on Brokeback Mountain by calling it homophobe when he signifies a certain "cut" from the boys' first sex scene to finding a dead animal somewhere... he may be full of shit but he blows my mind neverthless and I leave his reviews often having a new perspective on film. I may disagree with it, but it's there and it's memorable... unlike Ebert's cuddly approach. Will expand in 3 years.
|
|