Pauline Kael -- crazy as a soup sandwich
CharlasLibrary of America Subscribers
Únete a LibraryThing para publicar.
Este tema está marcado actualmente como "inactivo"—el último mensaje es de hace más de 90 días. Puedes reactivarlo escribiendo una respuesta.
1Truett
Hope this doesn't offend any fans -- do critics have fans? -- but of all the Library of America volumes I have purchased, THE AGE OF MOVIES: THE SELECTED WRITINGS OF PAULINE KAEL is the only one I immediately got rid of after trying to read (most of) it. Usually, I had to stop reading Kael's reviews because they were so god-awfully wrong-headed. She wrote like an uptight, conservative middle-aged white man trapped in a woman's body -- without the benefit of any feminine wiles or intuition.
And while I know none of us can shield ourselves from subjectiveness, her idea of what was good (quality) what wasn't was (and still is) so off kilter it would make Donald Trump look like an upright individual.
In case an example of why I say this is needed, hereya go: When it comes to films, I dig a wide range of them. Even the popcorn, "no-brainer" flicks, and to that end I'd say I've enjoyed a Brian De Palma film or two. But to sing his praises as much as Kael does in this book whilst decrying or ignoring far more talented filmmakers like Hitchcock or Capra and others is crazy as a soup sandwich. (Part of me can't believe that she was so revered, but then when one considers what often passed for criticism in the cinema arena -- BEFORE the influx of vidiots and twitter-brains -- I guess I'm not that surprised).
Worst of all, her writing wasn't all that terrific. I enjoyed -- and still possessively cling to -- far better tomes of movie criticism like HARLAN ELLISON'S WATCHING (and the almost-as-great, HARLAN ELLISON'S ENDLESSLY WATCHING) as well as WEAPONS OF MASS SEDUCTION by Lucius Shepard (Shepard hated damn near EVERY thing -- and I enjoyed a LOT of the films he eviscerated -- but I still found his essays on film to be VERY entertaining, and very informative. I was "hipped" to Del Toro's early work via his essays).
I know the book has been out a while, but it's still in print, and...what the hell, with the Oscars just around the corner, this is kind of timely.
And while I know none of us can shield ourselves from subjectiveness, her idea of what was good (quality) what wasn't was (and still is) so off kilter it would make Donald Trump look like an upright individual.
In case an example of why I say this is needed, hereya go: When it comes to films, I dig a wide range of them. Even the popcorn, "no-brainer" flicks, and to that end I'd say I've enjoyed a Brian De Palma film or two. But to sing his praises as much as Kael does in this book whilst decrying or ignoring far more talented filmmakers like Hitchcock or Capra and others is crazy as a soup sandwich. (Part of me can't believe that she was so revered, but then when one considers what often passed for criticism in the cinema arena -- BEFORE the influx of vidiots and twitter-brains -- I guess I'm not that surprised).
Worst of all, her writing wasn't all that terrific. I enjoyed -- and still possessively cling to -- far better tomes of movie criticism like HARLAN ELLISON'S WATCHING (and the almost-as-great, HARLAN ELLISON'S ENDLESSLY WATCHING) as well as WEAPONS OF MASS SEDUCTION by Lucius Shepard (Shepard hated damn near EVERY thing -- and I enjoyed a LOT of the films he eviscerated -- but I still found his essays on film to be VERY entertaining, and very informative. I was "hipped" to Del Toro's early work via his essays).
I know the book has been out a while, but it's still in print, and...what the hell, with the Oscars just around the corner, this is kind of timely.
