Paying her money like anybody else, Kael left the theater transformed or cheated. (“Robbe-Grillet . . . may say that . . . the existence of the two characters begins when the film begins and ends ninety-three minutes later, but, of course, we are not born when we go in to see a movie though we may want to die by the time we leave.”) Kael made prissy writers like Sarris uncomfortable because she demanded more from movies, from life, than they did. It was easy to find yourself in Kael’s essays; it was harder to get out of them. As with West Side Story: Ik heb in mijn essay over Nine½ Weeks geclaimd dat die film één grote ode is aan de geneugten van het This is a book that meant a great deal to me when I was in college and looking forward to a career as a professor of film history and criticism. (It never happened, but that is a long story.) or even extraordinary, but at the very least they are all very good movies. But then of course, what Then the bugaboo, The Auteur Theory : This you must read, for The Kael is a Killer here. "What is all this nonsense about?" she asks most sensibly, noting that any film involves a team and Golden Age directors were simply assigned films. With deadly accuracy, she demolishes auteurism.

of a Psycho” is far from a waste of time, what makes this new drive-in double feature from Vinegar Syndrome truly seksueel actieve vrouw die daarmee haar toegewezen plaats verlaat, de status quo bedreigt en om die reden I have always been a great admirer of Kael's film criticism, even while most of the time I didn't agree with her. There is something about her writing that even while she dislikes a film and will bluntly just say that she dislikes movies that others consider good or even great, she enjoys the act of experiencing the picture and talking about them. I also love how she often will gauge the reactions of an audience around her, even mentioning comments by people made during the viewing. Gauging audience reaction is a big part (in my honest opinion) as to whether a picture is working or not. The other night I saw JURASSIC WORLD: FALLEN KINGODOM and while I hated it (it is a really badly scripted movie), the audience didn't seem to care and loved watching the humans running from and (some) being eaten by dinosaurs. A group behind me made some amusing comments, and it reminded me of Kael and I am sure that if she were alive and reviewing the picture from that screening, she would use some of those comments to enhance her point.

On "West Side Story" : Boobs and wiseguys, she asserts, try to impress with their seriousness. When the always boring Stanley Kauffmann calls it the best musicom ever made, The Kael snorts. The best are those which celebrate high spirits, giddy romance and light satire like "Singin' in the Rain," she counters.

wil ik mensen best uitdagen om met een lijst van tien films te komen van voor 1987 waarin een vrouw de rol van psychopathische dit ook precies is wat Anger met zijn meest recente film Missoni (2011) duidelijk wil maken. Het is een soort reclamefilm in opdracht voorThe first Kael -- Light Kael -- writes these incredibly nuanced, incredibly humane essays that do what criticism is supposed to do: they show you something about a work of art you could not see yourself. For instance, she's able to take an art house film that I didn't fully understand (e.g. Jules and Jim) and show me exactly what made it worthwhile; or take a movie that I had reservations about (e.g. 8 1/2) and put words to what I couldn't, pinpointing precisely why the movie rings hollow. She just cares about art so much, and that shines in every sentence Light Kael writes. When an interviewer asked her in later years as to what she had "lost", as indicated in the title, Kael averred, "There are so many kinds of innocence to be lost at the movies." [1] It is the first of Kael's books titled with deliberately erotic connotations, typifying the sensual relation Kael perceived herself as having with the movies, as opposed to the theoretical bent that some among her colleagues had.

In this, her first collected volume, The Kaeler is at her best and most fresh. I may disagree with her, but there's never been a film critic with her quirky mind coupled with her stylish writing.Sex is the great leveler; taste the great divider. I have premonitions of the beginning of the end when a man who seems charming or at least remotely possible starts talking about movies. When he says, “I saw a great picture a couple of years ago—I wonder what you thought of it?” I start looking for the nearest exit. His great picture generally turns out to be He Who Must Die or something else that I detested—frequently a socially conscious problem picture of the Stanley Kramer variety. Boobs on the make always try to impress with their high level of seriousness (wise guys, with their contempt for all seriousness). MLA style: "Pauline Kael: I lost it at the movies.." The Free Library. 1993 Artforum International Magazine, Inc. 28 Nov. 2023 https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Pauline+Kael%3a+I+lost+it+at+the+movies.-a014580121 What I like especially about Miss Kael's book is that it is written from the outside. The trouble with most film criticism today is that it isn't criticism. It is, rather, appreciation, celebration, information, and it is written by intellectuals who have come to be "insiders" in the sense that they are able to discourse learnedly about almost any movie without thinking much about whether it's any good - the very question must strike them as a little naive, and irrelevant - because they see it as a greater, or lesser, manifestation of the mystery, the godhead of Cinema.

On "Breakfast at Tiffany's" : "Patricia Neal is amusing in a rather impenetrable role -- she seems to be a playing a lesbian and she's also keeping George Peppard. I don't think it's wise to let the mind linger too long over that." Is There a Cure for Film Criticism? Or, Some Unhappy Thoughts on Siegfried Kracauer's Theory of Film: The Redemption of Physical Reality Sex is the great leveler, taste the great divider. I have premonitions of the beginning of the end when a man who seems charming or at least remotely possible starts talking about movies. When he says, "I saw a great picture a couple of years ago--I wonder what you thought of it?" I start looking for the nearest exit. His great picture generally turns out to be He Who Must Die or something else that I detested--frequently a socially conscious problem picture of the Stanley Kramer variety. Boobs on the make always try to impress with their high level of seriousness (wise guys, with their contempt for all seriousness).On "A View from the Bridge" : "Arthur Miller's intention is to create tragedy; but what we see is a man behaving so insanely that we keep wondering why he wasn't put away." Recommended: For the film geekery set, although I will note that despite her protestations, her focus is on movies that we would now categorize as artsy or academic films with some notable exceptions. This is probably not a bad choice if you feel nostalgic about your Intro to Film History classes in college. In reference to the title of the book, the critic Jonathan Rosenbaum wrote an article entitled "I Missed It at the Movies: Objections to Raising Kane" as a rebuttal to Kael's essay on Citizen Kane, which had been entitled " Raising Kane".