IniciGrupsConversesMésTendències
Cerca al lloc
Aquest lloc utilitza galetes per a oferir els nostres serveis, millorar el desenvolupament, per a anàlisis i (si no has iniciat la sessió) per a publicitat. Utilitzant LibraryThing acceptes que has llegit i entès els nostres Termes de servei i política de privacitat. L'ús que facis del lloc i dels seus serveis està subjecte a aquestes polítiques i termes.

Resultats de Google Books

Clica una miniatura per anar a Google Books.

S'està carregant…

The Age of Movies: Selected Writings of Pauline Kael

de Pauline Kael

Altres autors: Sanford Schwartz (Editor)

MembresRessenyesPopularitatValoració mitjanaMencions
1341202,602 (4)1
A collection of signature writings by the former "The New Yorker" critic offers insight into her ability to capture cinematic details and includes appraisals of such works as "Bonnie and Clyde", "The Godfather", and "Last Tango in Paris."
Cap
S'està carregant…

Apunta't a LibraryThing per saber si aquest llibre et pot agradar.

No hi ha cap discussió a Converses sobre aquesta obra.

» Mira també 1 menció

I find it somewhat surprising that so few people have this one in their collections, and that I am the first to review it here. Certainly there are a lot of cinephiles on LT, and they would benefit from reading Kael's writings on individual films. I am loathe to call them reviews, because she went much deeper into meaning; they are instead essays that place the film within film history and the trends of the day.

She famously did not buy into French "auteur" theory and celebrated filmmakers for not repeating themselves. It strikes me that one of the reasons a director fits into that theory is just that: repetition. Of themes, of techniques.

This collection cherrypicks her work from various books she wrote, I think about ten books in all. Some of her most famous pieces are included here, such as "Bonnie and Clyde" and "Last Tango in Paris". By championing these two films in The New Yorker, she provided convincing evidence of their worth and managed to help make them financial successes -- that's how much clout she had.

She could be exasperatingly wrong about some films, such as "2001" and "West Side Story". Although I could see her points, I felt like she was missing the forest for the trees at times. But even those bad reviews are compelling reading. I was prepared to be upset, but that didn't happen. It is one of the qualities of a film that it affects each of us differently; it is what we bring to the film from personal experience, our philosophy of life, our visceral reaction that determines our opinion. So we bound to agree here and disagree there with others. Unfortunately, the editor (Sanford Schwartz) picks almost exclusively the best known films of the various decades; I would have loved to see some obscure films that she praised included here.

I have never really bought into the so-called genius of Godard, Fellini, Antonioni, and neither does Kael. After championing early Godard, she rightly dismisses his later "political" films as polemical drudgery. For her there are no sacred cows, which should be a prerequisite for becoming a critic.

She reviewed primarily from the late 60's, when The New Yorker hired her, until the early 90's. She was pretty opinionated, for sure, about the state of American cinema in the 60's, was excited about it in the 70's, and was disappointed by it in the 80's, which she saw as driven by box office receipts and primarily by the success of Spielberg and Lucas. She finally got fed up (and she had health issues).

There is another Kael collection that is somewhat similar, although it is over 1300 pages and this one is about 800. If you're looking for a Maltin-like film guide, they put out the "5001 Nights" collection of capsule reviews; this is obviously not intended for one seeking out her detailed analysis, but it does includes her snapshot opinions of the pre-60's films.

If you are at all interested in film criticism of the period, you need to read Pauline Kael. ( )
  nog | Jan 16, 2022 |
Kael was surely right to note in her foreword to Going Steady that her writing did indeed encompass an aesthetics, which she hoped would become less ‘elusive’ than one writer had deemed it (“Foreword” 1970, viii). It did so in the sort of theoretical reflection that jutted up explicitly in shorter passages, in paragraphs (the one on ‘the inverse equivalent of the Don Juan’ in Truffaut’s Story of Adele H. (“All for love” 57), for instance), in pregnant sentences or two here and there, showing that a theory does not require a treatise to be fruitful, and may be even more so when suggestive. Only the lack of spacing hides the extent to which Kael’s work is aphoristic (and this too is Adornian). It is as if at times the dark matter of theory can be transported only in the dark belly of a Trojan horse, disguised as one-liners...

Kael’s mixed, carefully-crafted high-low style, despite the mixed style of Shakespeare, would have offended British norms as much as it did William Shawn. Among British columnists only Clive James—with an Australian’s license, and even (at the time) contrarian requirement, to differ—was making the case for such a style. Such a style suggested a tonic subversion of just those divisions of labor, as did the extensive deep awareness of other arts she had accumulated by the time of occupation of her New Yorker berth: something that rendered her so well-qualified to write meaningfully of that arts-amalgam, film.
afegit per SnootyBaronet | editaPost Script, Paul Coates
 
Browsing through the Library of America’s massive new collection of her writing (called "The Age of Movies"), I was stunned at Kael’s range and power. Her voice, shaped by the American idiom, is still utterly fresh and dynamic. She is a superb role model for young writers. She has a keen eye for crisp detail and a lust for both attack and celebration. ...

What excited me anew about Kael’s work is that, even though she was writing solely about movies, she was constantly inventing fascinating paradigms and templates for talking about the creative process as well as the audience’s imaginative experience of performance. Because most of my career in the classroom has been at art schools (beginning at Bennington in the 1970s), I am hyper-aware of the often grotesque disconnect between commentary on the arts and the actual practice or production of the arts. Kael had phenomenal intuition and gut instinct about so many things—the inner lives of directors and actors, the tangible world of a given film, the energy of film editing.
afegit per SnootyBaronet | editaSalon, Camille Paglia
 
Nobody will ever again reign supreme over the movie world, because the movies don’t now reign supreme over anyone. All their secrets are known. People know so much about the movies that they know when to laugh when they watch Star Wars Uncut, possibly (to borrow her signature verbal device for one last time) the most sensational $10 pastiche-homage since Milton’s Garden of Eden. The grammar of the movies got into their heads as if it had been planted there by Noam Chomsky with a long needle. But it was a great age, and now, as part of its aftermath, it has produced a great book.
 

» Afegeix-hi altres autors

Nom de l'autorCàrrecTipus d'autorObra?Estat
Pauline Kaelautor primaritotes les edicionscalculat
Schwartz, SanfordEditorautor secundaritotes les edicionsconfirmat

Pertany a aquestes col·leccions editorials

Has d'iniciar sessió per poder modificar les dades del coneixement compartit.
Si et cal més ajuda, mira la pàgina d'ajuda del coneixement compartit.
Títol normalitzat
Informació del coneixement compartit en anglès. Modifica-la per localitzar-la a la teva llengua.
Títol original
Títols alternatius
Data original de publicació
Gent/Personatges
Llocs importants
Esdeveniments importants
Pel·lícules relacionades
Epígraf
Dedicatòria
Primeres paraules
Informació del coneixement compartit en anglès. Modifica-la per localitzar-la a la teva llengua.
Introduction: Describing the Italian film The Night of the Shooting Stars, in 1984, in The New Yorker, Pauline Kael wrote, in words that readers of hers over the years might have used to describe her own reviews, that the movie “is so good it’s thrilling.”
The film critic in the United States is in a curious position: the greater his interest in the film medium, the more enraged and negative he is likely to sound.
Citacions
Informació del coneixement compartit en anglès. Modifica-la per localitzar-la a la teva llengua.
Yeats said “Rhetoric is heard, poetry overheard,” and though I don’t agree, I think I see what he means, and I think this assumption is involved in much of the rejection of a talent like Welles’s. His work is often referred to as flashy and spectacular as if this also meant cheap and counterfeit. Welles is unabashedly theatrical in a period when much of the educated audience thinks theatrical flair vulgar, artistry intellectually respectable only when subtle, hidden.
Darreres paraules
Informació del coneixement compartit en anglès. Modifica-la per localitzar-la a la teva llengua.
(Clica-hi per mostrar-ho. Compte: pot anticipar-te quin és el desenllaç de l'obra.)
Nota de desambiguació
Editor de l'editorial
Creadors de notes promocionals a la coberta
Llengua original
Informació del coneixement compartit en anglès. Modifica-la per localitzar-la a la teva llengua.
CDD/SMD canònics
LCC canònic

Referències a aquesta obra en fonts externes.

Wikipedia en anglès (3)

A collection of signature writings by the former "The New Yorker" critic offers insight into her ability to capture cinematic details and includes appraisals of such works as "Bonnie and Clyde", "The Godfather", and "Last Tango in Paris."

No s'han trobat descripcions de biblioteca.

Descripció del llibre
Sumari haiku

Debats actuals

Cap

Cobertes populars

Dreceres

Valoració

Mitjana: (4)
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3 4
3.5
4 3
4.5
5 4

Ets tu?

Fes-te Autor del LibraryThing.

 

Quant a | Contacte | LibraryThing.com | Privadesa/Condicions | Ajuda/PMF | Blog | Botiga | APIs | TinyCat | Biblioteques llegades | Crítics Matiners | Coneixement comú | 203,232,790 llibres! | Barra superior: Sempre visible