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). 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.) APA style: Pauline Kael: I lost it at the movies.. (n.d.) >The Free Library. (2014). Retrieved Nov 28 2023 from https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Pauline+Kael%3a+I+lost+it+at+the+movies.-a014580121

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:

Create a new list

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. She is resolutely middlebrow in her taste, with a very light leaning toward the postmodern. While she hates big Hollywood productions like The Sound of Music, she appreciates Antonioni's L'Avventura and Godard's Breathless. 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." te zijn en ‘Fatal Attraction’ de clichématige. 'Ladder' is een film die mensen direct interessant en goed vinden, omdat 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.

Is There a Cure for Film Criticism? Or, Some Unhappy Thoughts on Siegfried Kracauer's Theory of Film: The Redemption of Physical Realitythe late, great Pauline Kael. This is a collection of her early, pre-New Yorker, writings about film. I have always been a Pauline Kael fan. I love the way she writes about movies -- even when I don't agree with her, or have no idea what she's talking about, it makes me excited about film and I find myself wanting to watch Last Year at Marienbad again (which normally is the kind of idea that should make you say OH FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE, NO.) just to see particular things she is talking about. All of that said, in many ways the woman was a raving lunatic, and that also comes through. I'm torn over whether or not to include some specific examples of her kookiness, mostly involving homosexuality but some real gems on race as well, because I worry that the fun of pointing and laughing at the crazy lady (and to be fair, some of it no doubt seemed less demented in the late 1950s/early 1960s) would overshadow her truly perceptive exploration of the movies and American culture. seksueel actieve vrouw die daarmee haar toegewezen plaats verlaat, de status quo bedreigt en om die reden A more adverse reaction comes from the auteurist Andrew Sarris, mainly as a result of the essay '" Circles and Squares", which was originally published in Film Quarterly. Sarris's reaction was in response to Kael's denunciation of the Auteur theory's merits, and has, in later years, occasionally jabbed at Kael's work. Examples of his critical observations are available in his books, e.g., The Primal Screen and Politics and Cinema. With the exception of "Circles and Squares", Kael has rarely responded. Notwithstanding Kael's unresponsive silence, this has gone down in film lore as the Sarris-Kael feud.