Comments on: A Critical Mauling

By: dcairns

dcairns — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 08:21:46 +0000

Oh, that’s VERY true!

Smart guy, Auden. “This is the night train, crossing the border…”

By: alex

alex — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:02:16 +0000

there is a good w.h. auden line about how it is impossible to write a bad review without showing off

By: dcairns

dcairns — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 19:50:10 +0000

Chris — yeah, but there’s filmmakers you’d like to rupture also.

Elver — EXCELLENT strategy!

David E — John Simon is NO GENTLEMAN! Hope the pasta was hot.

By: Chris B

Chris B — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:45:17 +0000

It should be like SPARTACUS:

“Ladies and gentlemen, should the irritating critic get a good old fashioned fisting?”

Audience (chanting): “TWO THUMBS UP! TWO THUMBS UP! TWO THUMBS UP!”

(I chose my words carefully there).

By: Elver

Elver — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:41:14 +0000

Wow. As the youngsters of today say, this article is made of epic win.

I’ve always found that an effective strategy of getting rid of critics (or at least confusing them) is to demand that they work harder. For example in film you point out a bad piece in your own flick that the critic missed, claim that it was far worse than what the critic noticed, and therefore the critic doesn’t know what he/she is talking about.

Admit your faults, but revalue them to discredit your critic.

There are few things as disarming as someone who admits they’re wrong.

By: David Ehrenstein

David Ehrenstein — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:12:57 +0000

Remember when Sylvia Miles dumped a plate of pasta on John Simon’s head?

Love that Sylvia!

By: dcairns

dcairns — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:05:23 +0000

I’m as guilty as anyone of glossing over the distinction between critics and reviewers. Critical analysis is extremely helpful. Consumer guide reviewing tends to fail on its own terms, since we’re all different. And 99% of writing about film is “just one man’s opinion”, multiplied by thousands. I like it when the critic is at least able to extract something interesting from the movie.

Artists are quite bad at taking criticism, but most mainstream criticism is Not Good — it is idea-light and cinematically illiterate. Not that that should justify actual bodily harm, but it should justify unemployment for a lot of the characters who perpetrate it.

(The writers I know of who visit this site are FIRST CLASS and are in no way included in the above.)

I *do* sympathise with people who write the weekly reviews, in that nothing is more calculated to put a person off cinema that having to sit through all the week’s releases and find something to say about them. Those who manage to do it and at least maintain enthusiasm for good filmmaking have my respect for that.

By: Cliff Burns

Cliff Burns — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:22:59 +0000

I think there are a lot of artists who would love to strap on the gloves and beat the crap out of their most vociferous critics. The problem is that certain critics lose their objectivity and direct their vitriol toward the artist rather than the work and THAT’S a no-no. One of the greatest writers of the 20th century, Louis Ferdinand Celine, was vilified for his anti-Semitism and he really was an unpleasant rotten human being. But that is entirely irrelevant when one is talking about the worthiness of his work.

I recall that terrific quote an old English teacher of mine used to toss around: “A critic is a legless man who teaches others how to run…” or words to that effect…