CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Film Critic Catch-All
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Film Critic Catch-All - Page 187

post #9301 of 9333
Thread Starter 

That's nice.

 

Guess I was too genuine for caring about a living thing.

 

Default back to catchphrases.

post #9302 of 9333

(sorry to chop this up so fine, anyone not interested in the minutia of me and Boone's couples therapy can scroll right along)

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

That's...not what I said. It's so, so, so, far off the mark from what I said I can't even begin to know where to respond. 

 

At no point did I say that Ehrlich is a bad person for making this list. I don't like his style, but I'm not in here calling him a fucking asshole misogynist or something. At no point did I say that his list is flawed because there are four out of 25 films directed by women on that list. In fact, I've been looking at some of the other lists that came out today/recently, and that's pretty good! Like I said, Ehrlich sees everything, and that means he's much better equipped to evaluate the year's films. That's better than most film critics (a population who is overwhelmingly white and male). And as noted, I brought up the fact that there were 4 out of 25 because that's something that interests me, and I thought was worth pointing out for the questions it raises, not just about this particular list, but lists in general, and the making of them. 

 

First of all, at no point did I say you called Ehrlich a bad person or anything.  But you said, quite directly, that you found his list deficient because of the type of filmmaker (not film), depicted.  And touted "Make Better Lists" as a slogan for correcting said deficiencies.  To claim this does not amount to dictating the content of said lists based on sociopolitical agendas is...difficult for me to parse.   

 

 

Quote:

At no point was I demanding he change his list to fit "quotas." 

 

 

Quota was my word, chosen to highlight what I saw as the deficiencies of your argument.  Which I took to be "4 female directors out of 25 films is objectively too few."  And there's a fair bit more to unpack there (starting with it being a top-down issue that huge majority of films are directed by men, continuing with whether director is really the be-all-end-all of a film's authorship, probably with a few detours about the proper shape of Batman's ears and what a piece of shit Donald Trump was today).   

 

Quote:

 I was saying that I think critics do have a responsibility, as we all do, to examine our own biases on a regular basis, even moreso when you're in a position of power or cultural responsibility.  And that we, as audiences, should be able to ask (note, ask, not demand) critics to explain their decisions (which they are entitled to say no to).

 

 

Which is all good.  "Make Better Lists" sounds a bit demand-y, is all.

 

Quote:

But I also think that the idea that a film or a work of art should be universal is flawed; there are great works of art that I'll never fully grok because the audience they were intended for is not one I belong to (whether that's time, location, or diverse background). Good criticism should be a conversation, not a lecture. We should be allowed to disagree with lists, but we should also be allowed to say why we disagree. 

 

 

I'm not sure where the universality of art came into things.  I thought I was arguing for privileging the subjectivity of a critic's personal responses over more global concerns. 

 

I agree that criticism should be a conversation rather than a lecture, and I don't think I said we shouldn't be allowed to disagree with a list.  Again, I thought I was arguing for the ability to people to articulate their thoughts completely freely.  Maybe where we're getting signals crossed is that I look at criticism as a form of, if not exactly art, then at least expression which warrants a generally similar approach to consuming.  I don't think a review or a list should be universal either, which is what I meant when I said David Ehrlich's list should reflect his tastes rather than a properly approved and notarized representational cross-section of directors.  

 

Quote:

Finally, as an aside, Schwartz, I think you're a good guy, so please understand there's no offense when I say this: You have this tendency to read into the things I post as some kind of social justice warrior attack on an individual, even when I go out of my way to be as nuanced as possible with this stuff. I'm well aware I'm in the minority here, and so I've tried to get better at articulating my opinion, but you still tend to read things into my posts that aren't there. But you were reading my post as an attack. That's not the case. I've stated before - in this very post even - that I don't think these things are meant as a personal attack, but rather asking questions about the broader cultural biases and lenses that shape our world. I notice this happens a lot when I challenge the idea that an individual should be aware of the world around them, rather than doing what speaks to them creatively, as an individual. You tend to interpret that as me calling for "censorship" or, in this case, "quotas" (which is not a word I would ever use). I'm not advocating for either. I'm not asking of either. What I'm arguing for is awareness, and balance between the two. And for you (and, honestly, others here) to keep misinterpreting my posts in this way, despite my best efforts to frame them in as generous a fashion as possible, is supremely frustrating.

 

No offense taken, and none meant (though if you do find any of the rest of this insulting, that's understandable).  And again, I don't think anything in my post framed your statements as condemning Ehrlich personally*.  What they were doing, imo, was telling him that he should think differently, or like this thing more than that thing, based on your own sociopolitical standards.  And yes, we all kind of do that all the time to some extent, but this is where the distinction between asking and demanding becomes important.  

 

And look, you're not wrong about how I interpret your posts.  Ironically (let's use the term loosely), I think this comes from my taking your posts in a broader context.  I don't read your individual posts in vacuum, but place them in a context of interactions stretching back over a decade.  And within that context a pattern has developed, which I think is fairly simple and rather telling.  More than any other poster I can think of in my entire tenure here, I feel I can most accurately predict your reaction to a particular piece of art or criticism based on how it aligns with your political views.  That impression may be false and it may be unfair, but it does not entirely gibe with the self-styling as the champion of nuance and constant interrogation of one's own biases.  I don't mean that to be hurtful, but in the interest of having all our cards up, it is where my occasional bits of irritation come from.  Which are very occasional, mind you.  To my mind this was a perfectly academic conversation about the ultimately trifling matter of which online film critic's year end lists we preferred to others.

 

 

*also, I'd watched that 2015 video once when it came out, but never learned his name until today, lest you think this stemmed from butthurt that you dared to criticize a personal hero

post #9303 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

That's nice.

 

Guess I was too genuine for caring about a living thing.

 

Default back to catchphrases.

Well you have learned your lesson, that's all that matters.

post #9304 of 9333

Also, I've been getting over a bout of food poisoning today, so apologies if I was crustier with Bart and Boone than normal.

post #9305 of 9333
it's this toxic culture!
post #9306 of 9333

That Ellis video is great, btw.  My brain seized up a bit at calling Stranger Things' synth score "TV movie-inspired" instead of citing Carpenter, but the cheap shot at BvS made up for it.

post #9307 of 9333

 I just watched Ellis's latest video and I enjoyed it. When I saw the opening for a split second I thought she was Rick rolling her audience. I would disagree with her about the Wolf of Wall Street. When I saw it, I laughed at not with the characters. Despite the money and hot woman, Jordon and his friends where such douchebags that I didn't envy them. Now when I watch Goodfellas, that is a different story. I guess there is a dark ends justify the means part of me that thinks  they are living the good life; or where until Henry got involved in coke.

 

  The appeal of Stranger Things was best summed up, IMO, by Honest Trailers: "The 80's where awesome and being an adult sucks."

post #9308 of 9333
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post
 

Also, I've been getting over a bout of food poisoning today, so apologies if I was crustier with Bart and Boone than normal.

I would use a catchphrase to signify we're cool, but you might get crusty with me again.

post #9309 of 9333

Schwartz, we good, and I appreciate the time you took to respond. I don't really have anything I disagree with, but I do try and approach a work of art with as open a mind as possible, flaws and all. I know that doesn't always come across - usually because more often than not here, we talk about films that have been out a while - but understand it is something I try to do. And, again, I like you and respect you, even though we may squabble from time to time. Like I said, it's ultimately water under the bridge here, we've all been around so long that we all know each other pretty well, so stuff like this isn't worth going "fuck you, no, fuck you" over. And I do enjoy when we disagree about this stuff - I just wanted to point out that sometimes I feel like I'm being misinterpreted.

 

Okay, couples therapy is over. Back to lists! Here's Sight and Sound's best of, which brings up the topic of the day on Film Twitter - is TWIN PEAKS THE RETURN a "movie?" (Matt Zoller Seitz put it as number 1 on his best TV of the year list.)

 

post #9310 of 9333
Thread Starter 

Does Silence count as 2017?

post #9311 of 9333
Thread Starter 

Moonlight also? I'm so confused.

post #9312 of 9333

That's a UK based list, we got some of those films a few months after you guys.

post #9313 of 9333
Thread Starter 

Oh! Duh-doy.

post #9314 of 9333

Bart, are you talking about a different list, because I don't see Silence or Moonlight on either of those.

 

Anyway, release dates are weird and I say that if a film doesn't open in your area until 2017, you should be able to count it on a 2017 list. 

post #9315 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Bart, are you talking about a different list, because I don't see Silence or Moonlight on either of those.

 

Anyway, release dates are weird and I say that if a film doesn't open in your area until 2017, you should be able to count it on a 2017 list. 

 

The list goes on a fraction longer than that one, not sure if your source cropped it:

 

http://www.bfi.org.uk/features/best-films-2017/

 

Moonlight is 19, Silence 25.

 

And LadyBird is 19 as well and we don't get that till next year, so there are no rules. Just anarchy.

post #9316 of 9333

Oh yeah, I saw that. My source did crop it. 

post #9317 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post

Schwartz, we good, and I appreciate the time you took to respond. I don't really have anything I disagree with, but I do try and approach a work of art with as open a mind as possible, flaws and all. I know that doesn't always come across - usually because more often than not here, we talk about films that have been out a while - but understand it is something I try to do. And, again, I like you and respect you, even though we may squabble from time to time. Like I said, it's ultimately water under the bridge here, we've all been around so long that we all know each other pretty well, so stuff like this isn't worth going "fuck you, no, fuck you" over. And I do enjoy when we disagree about this stuff - I just wanted to point out that sometimes I feel like I'm being misinterpreted.

Okay, couples therapy is over. Back to lists! Here's Sight and Sound's best of, which brings up the topic of the day on Film Twitter - is TWIN PEAKS THE RETURN a "movie?" (Matt Zoller Seitz put it as number 1 on his best TV of the year list.)



The next rank value after the three #12s should be #15.

This list is invalid.
post #9318 of 9333

Any list with ties is invalid.  Either number them shits, or don't.


Edited by Schwartz - 12/5/17 at 12:27pm
post #9319 of 9333

Haha, ties are part and parcel for Sight and Sound! They do this shit all the time! 

 

I agree. Ties on lists are the worst. 

post #9320 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Haha, ties are part and parcel for Sight and Sound!

Damn straight.  If you want your filthy jean jacket with tassels, go back to Rolling Stone.

post #9321 of 9333

Making lists before the year is over is weird but so many people do that. Everyone's afraid of deciding in January. Hell, if I were a critic, I'd drop mine in June next year. That way, I'd have a.) opportunity to see everything I wanted b.) time to better consider my choices and c.) the debate all to myself, instead of being lost among the torrent of lists crawling all over each other like World War Z zombies. Oh, and by then my readers would have actually been able to see half the films I'm listing!

post #9322 of 9333

Fear of the Velvet Curtain

NOTES ON THE LANDLORD AND LEE GRANT

by Dennis Cozzalio
 
 
 
"Hal Ashby’s The Landlord, made in 1970, is probably the best movie of the 1970s not to be widely known by younger audiences, and even by some older audiences whose appreciation of the last great era of American moviemaking needs to be expanded beyond go-to classics like The Godfather and Chinatown and Taxi Driver. It’s Ashby’s first directorial effort, after work as assistant editor and chief film editor on The Diary of Anne Frank, The Cincinnati Kid and In the Heat of the Night, and it finds Ashby delighting in the freedom of fashioning experimental rules of editorial and visual expression in the process of translating a script from Bill Gunn (Ganja and Hess), based on Kristin Hunter’s novel, into what stands today as one of the funniest, most honest, cogent and probing explorations of race and American race relations in movie history. We had it on during dinner at my house last week when it aired on Turner Classic Movies, and several times my daughters sat up, listened, and even expressed shock at some of the things the movie was talking about, and especially the way it was talking about them. As kids in 2017 they’re not used to seeing movies with a true measure of frankness about any subject that’s not meant primarily as simple shock value, but then I’d wager most adults, conditioned to respond to a constant barrage of multiplex stimuli over the course of 30 or more years, might find The Landlord sort of shocking too. Which is one vital reason why it should be more well-known.
 
The Landlord is also notable for its cast, with great turns from undervalued character actors like Walter Brooke, Mel Stewart, Will MacKenzie, Susan Anspach, Marki Bey, and Beau Bridges in the titular role as Elgar, a clueless rich kid who, at 29 years old, rejects the influence of his moneyed parents and decides to turn a Harlem tenement into his personal reclamation project. But as good as Bridges is—and he’s terrific– three women in particular form the beating heart of The Landlord’s satiric and socially conscious heart."
post #9323 of 9333

I just got done binging Ashby's whole 70's output. "The Landlord" is a hell of a movie (though "Harold and Maude" is still my favorite).

post #9324 of 9333
2017 In Review

The Best Movies of 2017

post #9325 of 9333
post #9326 of 9333

A great deep dive from Jeremy Smith about one of the earliest "fake newsmen," the infamous Super Shadow: 

https://www.thrillist.com/entertainment/nation/star-wars-supershadow-spoilers 
 

Also, a title for his upcoming book on online film journalism - When It Was Cool - and a release date (First quarter 2018). 

post #9327 of 9333
Thread Starter 

Oh man, I remember Super Shadow!

post #9328 of 9333
I didn't follow episode one stuff back then, so I don't know about supershadow

how fun
post #9329 of 9333
Supershadow even had his “scoops” for Episodes 10-12, I believe. Him and George were besties even though he was spoiling George’s shit everywhere haha
Edited by Carnotaur3 - 12/11/17 at 2:39pm
post #9330 of 9333

I knew people who swore by Super Shadow, no matter what.  I was in my early twenties during the run up to Episode I, and even I was taken in for a little while.  Fortunately, reality eventually asserted itself.

post #9331 of 9333

wow, supershadow's what-if scoops remind me a LOT of BARRY

 

 

BARRY

 

is you?

post #9332 of 9333

I vaguely remember this guy. Stealing photos of girls online and proclaiming them to be his "hot girlfriend" makes me think this guy might be in jail at this point.

post #9333 of 9333

just finished reading Beaks' piece

 

 

that's just really really sad...

 

and now it's the norm

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movie Miscellany
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Film Critic Catch-All