June 3, 2006
Critics and shorts.
David Chute sees his capsule reviews for the LA Weekly filleted by the editorial blade, recalls the days when there was a difference between page layouts in the alternative weeklies and USA Today and writes, "Unless I'm over-thinking this (which is always a possibility) it appears that we are now edging alarmingly close to the policing of thought, to the suggestion that any attempt to sneak around the restrictions with shorthand or allusive phraseology will be dealt with harshly. Reminds me irresistably of my favorite editorial complaint of recent years, also from a watchdog at the Weekly, that a certain graph contained 'too many facts.'"
Update: Do not read on until you have read this.
Fortunately, David Chute has a blog and it's there that we can read his takes on Typhoon and Fanaa as he intended them to be read. And readers will catch on. They will pick up the weeklies only when they're looking to buy or sell something, in other words, for the classifieds (a purely workaday service rapidly being supplanted by the likes of Craigslist), discard the rest and go online to read what their favorite writers actually have to say. It's there that, as Roger Ebert has told Cinematical's Christopher Campbell, "Good writing will prevail."
Related: Edward Copeland, Ray Pride and David Poland, commenting on Anne Thompson's piece in the Hollywood Reporter. And, as noted yesterday), she's most helpfully rounded up pointers to related entries out there: Jon Fine (Business Week), Andrew Horbal (Blogcritics), Joe Morgenstern (Wall Street Journal), Peter Suderman (Alarm!), Jeff Jarvis (BuzzMachine), Marc E Babej and Tim Pollak (Forbes), AJ Schnack and, of course, Dave Kehr.
Also related: Anthony Kaufman documents the slow and painful self-destruction of the Village Voice/New Times papers here and here. While you're there, read his take on why he simply cannot agree with "venerable critics who I have the utmost respect for" when it comes to Southland Tales.
Clive James [site] reviews American Movie Critics: An Anthology From the Silents Until Now: "It quickly becomes obvious that those without theories write better.... [P]erceptions aren't just more entertaining than formal schemes of explanation, they're also more explanatory." Yes, he has his favorites. If you're looking for a piece to tussle with over the weekend, here you go.
Also in the New York Times:
The story has had enormous influence, indirectly, on the structure and tone of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness... and on films such as The Others.... In 1954, Benjamin Britten's opera based on the story was first produced. In 1971, Marlon Brando starred as the evil Peter Quint in The Nightcomers, a dark prequel to James's story. In 1974, ABC Television in the US made a rather clunky version of the story with Lynn Redgrave as the governess. But it is the 1961 adaptation called The Innocents starring Deborah Kerr - scripted by William Archibald, who wrote the Broadway play of the story, and Truman Capote, with some dialogue by John Mortimer, and just released on DVD in this country - that best catches the psychological eeriness, the claustrophobia and the essential ambiguity of the original story by James.
Also in the Guardian: They should've remade Omen III: The Final Reckoning instead of The Omen, argues John Patterson.
Via Cartoon Brew, Esther Leslie in Tate Etc on the "collision between high art abstraction and mass commercial culture" in the work of Oskar Fischinger.
It's not often that Ed Gonzalez gives a film four out of four stars at Slant. But then, films like Pandora's Box, "a stirring vision of the world gripped by a sinister moral vice - a nosedive into a carnal abyss of despair lined with visionary chiaroscuro sights and thorny mythological references," aren't all that common, either.
In Frieze, Tom Morton interviews Pierre Huyghe, whose "installations, films and collaborative works have looked at the relationship between our experiences, the past, our expectations and the future." Also, Max Andrews: "Iraq, the former Yugoslavia, Kurdistan, Chechnya, Lebanon: the regions visited or invoked in the six films that comprised A Picture of War is Not War were a sobering, conflict-ridden roll-call."
RES profiles:
Jay A. Fernandez in the Los Angeles Times: "A collaboration between British documentary director James Marsh (Troubleman, The Burger and the King) and writer-producer Milo Addica (Monster's Ball, Birth), The King, which opens in Los Angeles on Friday, is a movie that unfolds with the dread of a looming execution. And some viewers are likely to experience no small discomfort with the brooding drama's emotional, sexual, spiritual and thematic terrain."
On the Boston Phoenix's Outside the Frame blog, Peter Keough talks with Michael Cuesta about 12 and Holding. Related: David D'Arcy's April interview.
20 years after Heavy Metal Parking Lot [site], William F Yurasko gets John Heyn and Jeff Krulik reflecting on the whole "Parking Lot Odyssey." Via Gabriel Wardell.
Richard Linklater's working on a documentary about Texas baseball. Cedric Golden reports for the Austin American-Statesman. Via Matt Dentler.
Jason Kottke gives five out of five stars to Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.
Online viewing tip #1. Via Movie City News, the trailer for Woody Allen's Scoop, which looks a lot more like The Curse of the Jade Scorpion than Match Point.
Online viewing tip #2. Chris Moukarbel's World Trade Center, "adaptation of an extract of the screenplay of Oliver Stone's forthcoming film," as the Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art puts it. Via Scott Macaulay at Filmmaker.
Online viewing tip #3. the show with
zefrank. Via everybody, all of a sudden.
Posted by dwhudson at June 3, 2006 12:57 PM
Regarding David Chute's complaints: Chute neglected to mention that he failed to show up for his screening, then turned in two graphs that were sloppily written and completely arcane to the general reader. I was his editor. Ella Taylor, LA Taylor
This is, I'm afraid, a pretty solid example of one aspect of blogging that gives blogs their rotten reputation among established journalists. If I saw David Chute's entry and decided I wanted to write a story about it for a print publication, I wouldn't think twice before picking up the phone or emailing the Weekly for the editor's side of the story. That's the modus operandi.
The modus operandi for link-aggregating blogs like this one, on the other hand, is to find an interesting item to point to, contextualize it in some way (in this case, within the framework of a widespread discussion of the state of film criticism), and - and this is the crucially dangerous moment here - move on without a second thought to the next interesting item.
Compiling these daily briefings on what all is being said, written, blurbed and linked to on any particular day, is a service (of sorts) many have expressed appreciation for, but it is also, as I'm reminded now in the most humbling of ways, a perilously thin one.
If I'd had any inkling that you, Ella, one of my own favorite writers, were the editor DC's referring to, and had I known the other side of the story, the circumstances behind DC's post, I probably wouldn't have pointed to it at all. There's a virtual whirlwind of complaint at the moment about the machinery of the publishing industry driving serious criticism out of its system. DC's post seemed a neat fit. Too neat, I know now, and for that I don't hestitate a moment to apologize.
Posted by: David Hudson at June 3, 2006 3:26 PMI think Ian McShane, is playing David Chute in Woody Allen's 'Scoop.'
Posted by: Jerry Lentz at June 3, 2006 5:16 PMHaving apparently jumped to one comclusion, you should have been a little more cautious about compounding the mistake by jumping to another. The one offense I am willing to cop to was airing in public an incident that should have been discussed privately or not at all. Beyond that, no conclusions can be drawn about whwt actually occurred. The principles disagree about almost every detail.
My original post has been significantly modified to remove the offending graphs, and now contains a couple of new ones that will my last word on this subject: http://davidchute.journalspace.com/?cmd=forward&entryid=302
And as devoted fan of Deadwood (recently reprieved, it seems, for a fourth season), it would be a great honor to be portrayed by Ian McShane, in any light whatsoever.
Posted by: David Chute at June 5, 2006 2:19 PMDavid, I've clearly read and appreciated your work for years, and so, since you've written last word on this at Hungry Ghost, I'll respect that, too.
Posted by: David Hudson at June 6, 2006 7:04 AMSome new thoughts there, too, on the current buzz about themselves that has sparked among critics by a series of firings of older, more experienced crirics that have people wondering if we are a dying breed. The truth is, the entire culture is gtoing through an e
inexorable Boiled Frog process of getting dumbed down. More high-minded pundits than I have noticed that both The New Yorker and the fabled NYT Arts & Liesure section are shadows of their former selves. John Rockwell, the man who brought rock criticism to the Times, was let go for not being "populist" enough. I have little doubt that the increasing centralization ot the Village Voice/New Times chain will accelerate this erosion in what used to be called alternative media. The specific local examples matter a great deal less than the overall phenomenon.
I think that, over a period of many, many years now, we've been seeing a redefining of terms like "alternative media." I find what's happening to print media across the board, with the probable exception of books (for the time being), profoundly sad. You should see my desk. It's a messy testament to my love for newspapers, magazines, journals, flyers - in short, paper.
But for all that's happening to it now, I have no doubt that there is good, solid reason to hope that film criticism will thrive no matter what happens to alt-weeklies and the like. A whole lot of people want to write it and a whole lot of people want to read it; media online actually make it easier for the minority of these two crowds, the good writers and the good readers, to find each other.
Posted by: David Hudson at June 6, 2006 4:59 PMAll due sympathy and respect to those whose paychecks and lives are being shaken up by current publishing changes ...
That said, as a guy who enjoys writing about the arts and gabbing with other people about 'em (and who's now blogging instead of wrestling with pro publishing), I've never been happier. Of course, I'm lucky enough to have a not-too-bad day job ... Funny to think that in the back and forth, wish and wash of online chitchat, a few people who gab about the arts will get paid for it. I wonder who? I wonder on what basis?
Posted by: Michael Blowhard at June 9, 2006 2:55 PM







Subscribe to GreenCine Daily by email