Tonight in Seattle:  

For the love of movie criticism

On Thursday night February 18, the Northwest Film Forum will be showing the documentary For The Love Of Movies: The Story of American Film Criticism. It's a straightforward, succinct accounting of the history of movie criticism since its inception, starting with a critic who wrote hype sheets and blurbs and ended up helping D.W. Griffith craft The Birth of a Nation and other early classic cinema. Through the underdog aesthetics of Manny Farber at The Nation in the mid-20th century, to the dialectical sparring between Pauline Kael and Andrew Sarris (chief film reviewers for the New Yorker and the Village Voice and New York Observer, respectively), you can see what inspired the early rock critics into taking sides and styles that helped evolved that art form.

Made by longtime Boston Phoenix critic Gerald Peary, The Love of Movies makes good on its title. You can feel the passion for film from portions of reviews that are read, and from the way the public often regarded tastemakers for the dailies and other mediums. Excellent interviews with Elvis Mitchell (whose 1970s and '80s Rolling Stone interviews with directors and actors were what got me hooked on reading about pop culture from a critical but encouraging perspective), Roger Ebert, and even on-line fan guru Harry Knowles make this a reflective study in some of the great writing and vibrant personal opinions that are in and behind exceptional film criticism. I could have used at least a mention of influential marginals like Robin Wood, a Canadian Marxist-Feminist who wrote phenomenal studies like Hollywood From Vietnam to Reagan and Hitchcock, but there are lots of juicy tidbits about how Kael shifted her position from criticizing Sarris and the "Auteur theory" when she found visionary directors of her own to triumph. (She still kicked ass, though -- think of her as the Chuck Klosterman of her time, crediting both working class art and demystifying commercial pabulum.) Kael would manipulate younger critics by praising them and then turning them into what Sarris called "Paulettes." Yet he never lost respect for his adversary, and was saddened by her death.

This doc only shows for one night, but try to catch it if you're into any kind of pop culture criticism. If you only know music magazines and blogs you might be amazing at how the aesthetics of film criticism developed, from political activism to the championing of European and independent films (much like how we've come up with "cult rock" artists). And as you watch the fiery feuds fade into the dimming of the day for movie critics at newspapers and magazines which are ceasing to exist, the soulful version of "Hard Times Don't Come Again No More" playing over the end credits actually doesn't seem overly dramatic.

I saw this also and thought it was pretty interesting in terms of the history of criticism, but I was hoping for a larger examination of print vs. online critics. Also, I think it made me like Kenneth Turan a little bit more (re: his battle w/Cameron over the Titanic review), and why did Lisa Schwarzbaum feel the need to mention HIKING every time they talked to her?
She was riffing, I guess! That Turan stuff was tops for sure. I think what I found exciting about this doc, and why I would recommend it to any aspiring pop culture critic, is just how knowledgeable and deeply opinionated (in terms of ideology and aesthetics) many movie critics were. I kind of feel contemporary rock critics -- and current on-line reviewers -- lack the points of view necessary to make their opinions compelling. It's often synopsis, description, facts (or lack of accuracy in them), but not coming up with theories that encourage, reflecting stories that inspire. As the theologian Bonhoeffer said, "Immediacy is a deception." I admire Harry Knowles for doing what he's done, but his biographical digressions are far from the deeply humane and humanist insight an Ebert can craft.
Thanks, Imaginary Girls, from the filmmaker for your cogent remarks. As for Robin Wood, I love his passionate,brilliant writing. Check out his extraordinary book on Alfred Hitchcock. The essay on Marnie! Wow! Super-Wow! Why isn't he in the movie? Because he was a Brit moved to Canada, not an American film critic. That's the reason. Amie Simon: Lisa wants everyone to take a hike! I think film critics worry about being perceived as unexercised geeks who never leave the dark. I take as much pride in the fact that I play pickup basketball twice a week as Lisa does in heading for the trails. Chris Estay:Interesting thoughts. I guess point-of-view is different from an opinion, the former developed slowly from both living a full life and being culturally educated and informed. Yes, a good critic has a point-of-view. Everyone has opinions. Finally, I want to say that if anyone wants to purchase my DVD, I am self-distributing at: http://fortheloveofmovies.net/store

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.