Cinemascope

> She may not be everyone's cup of tea but Dewey > certainly didn't deserve to get slammed by you for > liking Kael. But why -- OH WHY!!! -- would you assume that giving a counter-opinion is in any way, shape, or form, any kind of attack that Dewey should take personally? Just because I (or anybody else for that matter) happens to have the contrary view, doesn't mean it's an attack on Dewey! Here's an excerpt that shows some of the criticism levied against Kael -- for those who are interested! The coercive effect of Kael's technique was not simply contrarian, which might have had its praiseworthy aspects; "For Keeps" makes it clear, as Adler noted years ago, that this is a critic who brooks no contradiction and turns herself into a pretzel to stun the reader into agreement that a worthless film has moments that outshine, and outmerit, actual masterpieces, if for no better reason than that the film was made by one of the directors she routinely fawned over, like De Palma. When it suits her, Kael does a complete volte-face and fetishizes the transcendent artistry of De Sica's "Shoeshine," for example, or treats us to an extremely long, extremely ill-informed analysis of how things work in Hollywood to explain "why today's movies are so bad." It is, perhaps, the absence of any real sensibility rooted in any consistent method of analysis that makes Pauline Kael's collections of reviews the kinds of books I don't like having in my house. She's not a real voice but more like a suet of arbitrary, extemporized pronouncements. She is Gertrude Stein's Oakland; There's no there there. http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2007/02/prose_and_cons_critics_on_kael.html

Well, if we use "catchy phrase" to include anything that might get used by the studios in their ads, you might actually find there is no shortage of catchy phrases: (1) Remember to always supply the studios with mixed similes that sound profound, but say nothing "As deeply poignant as it is extremely funny!" - Barbara Siegel (Entertainment Syndicate) on ?Moonlight and Valentino." "Andy Garcia is as funny as he is sexy" - Jeanne Wolf (Jeanne Wolf's Hollywood) on "Steal Big, Steal Little." (2) Remember to always supply the studios with "best of the year" quotes, even though it may be three or more months before the year's end "The best date movie of the year!" - Ray Pride (New City) on "The Brothers McMullen," released Aug. 9. "The best party movie of the year!" - Peter Travers (Rolling Stone) on "Unzipped," released Aug. 4. (3) Remember to always supply the studios with recycled, brain-dead adverb/adjective combinations, especially using the word "entertaining" "Robustly entertaining!" - Peter Travers (Rolling Stone) on "Federal Hill" "Marvelously entertaining!" - Paul Wunder (WBAI radio) on "Rob Roy" "Extremely entertaining!" - Paul Wunder (WBAI radio) on "Kicking and Screaming." "Wildly entertaining!" - Joel Siegel (ABC-TV) on "Pocahontas" "Highly entertaining!" - Ana Maria Bahiana (Screen International) on "Now and Then." "Totally entertaining!" - Jeanne Wolf (Jeanne Wolf's Hollywood) on "Father of the Bride Part II." "Terrifically entertaining!" - Jack Mathews (NY Newsday) on "Forget Paris." "Infectiously entertaining!" - Barbara and Scott Siegel (Entertainment Syndicate) on "Outbreak" "Thoroughly entertaining!" - Barbara and Scott Siegel (Entertainment Syndicate) on "Free Willy 2." (4) Ditto No. 3, but substitute the word "funny" for "entertaining" "Devilishly funny!" - Joanne Kaufman on "Shallow Grave" "Hysterically funny!" - Jan Wahl on "Don Juan DeMarco" "Enormously funny!" - Kenneth Turan on "Muriel's Wedding" "Outrageously funny!" - Don Stotter (Entertainment Timeout Syndicate) on "Vampire in Brooklyn" "Paynefully funny!" - Barbara and Scott Siegel (Entertainment Syndicate) on "Major Payne" "Riotously funny!" - Jeffrey Lyons (Sneak Previews) on "Grumpier Old Men" "Genuinely funny!" - Mike Roberts (Vancouver Province) on "The American President" "Wickedly funny!" - Owen Glieberman (Entertainment Weekly) on "The Brady Bunch Movie" "Laugh-out-loud funny!" - Owen Glieberman (Entertainment Weekly) on "Mighty Aphrodite" (5) Remember to supply the studios with plenty of movies deemed "Must See!" "A must-see for the whole family!" - Lisa Petrillo (WLPG-TV) on "Babe" "A must-see four-star winner!" - Bobbie Wygant (KXAS) on "Waterworld" "A must-see for children of all ages from 6-60!" - Paul Clinton (Turner Entertainment) on "Free Willy 2" "Truly a must-see epic event!" - Barry Zavan (Channel America Network) on "Othello" "A must-see!" - Elayne Blythe (Film Advisory Board) on "Indian in the Cupboard" "A must-see!" - Ron Brewington (American Urban Radio) on "Congo" "A must-see!" - Jeff Craig (60 Second Preview) on "Mute Witness" "A must-see!" - Steve Arvin (UPI radio) on "Father of the Bride Part II"

But not nearly as worthless as your opinion is to me, hun. At least I try to keep an open mind.

On a related note, and not exactly regarding critics, but don't you just love some of the old-fashioned headlines from the trade papers? CRIX NIX HICKS PIX -- remember that one?

But on the other hand, too many critics may look for some catchy phrase or soundbite, especially for radio and TV, that doesn't offer much insight but that people might remember just because it's catchy.

It's a shame that the DVD is OOP and hasn't been re-issued.

Actually, there are a lot of active critics today who do a heck of a lot more than "provide a synopsis" and say whether they liked it or not. There is a lot more analysis going on out there that has caught your eye, apparently. As for Pauline Kael, well, it's already been mentioned here several times why she was an awful critic (albeit perhaps an interesting writer).

Anyone else excited to see this wonderful movie tonight? I love Wuthering Heights, both the novel and the movie!

Cool photos.

It would be a bit of bad taste to dig him up only so he could be in the Oscar ceremony!

Since when does Ebert "love everything"? You're not referring only to his reviews since his hospitalization, are you? He's been super picky lately because he's in very fragile health... but if that's not it, then I can think of plenty of negative reviews he's written in the last few years.

Glad to know word of mouth was at least a bit helpful... Considering there's probably over 500 movies being released theatrically each year... I would still think getting opinions from others may be very helpful.... otherwise it's basically a bit of a blind date

Isn't it bizarre to spend big buck$ at the movies without getting someone else's opinion? (At least in some cases) Whether it be a friend, relative, or a critic? I think most people rely on word-of-mouth to some extent or another...

I love that there are critics who we can turn to to get an opinion about movies before or after we watch a movie! I'm sorry to hear (from what I've read in other threads) that some people have a negative opinion about critics in general because they haven't been able to find a reliable critic. That can make a big difference. I know which critics are worth listening to me personally, and I know how closely I may or may not be likely to agree with them. You wouldn't expect a close friend or spouse to always agree with you on every movie, so why should you expect that of a critic? If you take a bit of time to figure out which ones are the best barometers for your personal taste and preferences, they can be very helpful to read -- before or after. Many movies can elicit totally different reactions on every person... sometimes comparing and contrasting opinions can be illuminating on any number of levels. When the opinions are too far apart, it may not work at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MC6Teda0y8A Now, that's entertainment!

Sorry Anne, I actually was about to type a long post and hit "enter" accidentally. I apologize if you thought that post was actually meant to say just "um"

> Anne, I believe it was Rob Lowe who was featured in > the Snow White number. Well, there you go... it really could be a lot worse!

Yeah, that's better. Look, Anne, it really all comes down to expectations. At this point, I'm not really particularly interested in anything the Oscar ceremony has to offer. I prefer knowing the winners IRT and if there's a good montage that includes classic movies, I'll watch that. Everything else, I can just tune out and keep chatting online. If something good comes up and I wasn't paying attention, it's not a problem, I rewind the TiVo. This is really the perfect arrangement as far as I am concerned, I get what I want out of it and the silly stuff doesn't bother me none, I turn the volume down and tune it out. As for prices of senior tickets, yes I do believe they can be quite a break, but of course it depends on the theater chain and the restrictions. Having said that, a lot of theaters have matinee prices that are almost as cheap as senior tickets, so I'm not complaining, either!

*double post*

np Anne

lol, that sounds like the musical chairs of the Oscars!

Heh, good ol' times, heh? I kept wandering why everyone was complaining about this year's telecast being too long... then realized *they* probably weren't multi-tasking, I had stuff going on online and just didn't pay attention whenever something didn't seem interesting. Time went by just as it always does!

> I have to say, if viewing classics openly with other > folks got to be like that letter you posted - I'm > afraid I wouldn't want to go to the theatre to see > any of these movies. Afraid that's the case, indeed! I watched Lawrence of Arabia at the Castro last year, when it was shown in 70mm. Good projection, but some stupid hyenas kept laughing for the stupidest reasons....

Well I meant the theater that is near your town... Maybe the size of the city no longer matters that much. Maybe a lot of people just have really nice home theater systems in their houses and enjoy that more than a nice, crisp, 35mm projection in a theater where they can share the experience. Who'd have thought, huh?

Claude's the man! If he can't do it, no one can!