In this delightful little memento of Pauline Kael, who is often addressed as the most influential film critic of our time, her acerbic, yet honest insights on a variety of topics come through in this informal interview clearly and entertainingly as they did in her published reviews. Kael is infamous for writing with brutal honesty on movies, directors and actors. Although, it was not her intention, she did not care who she offended or upset, but called them as she saw them.
As the author, Francis Davis confesses how he once used Kael’s review to convince a friend to watch a movie with him, Kael’s enthusiasm for films is highly contagious for she praised or slammed the movie with frivolous vitality.
The honesty and sincerity under all her flare allows her readers to relate better with her reviews. Being introduced to this legendary critic for the first time, I almost fell in love with her when Kael said, "It's not fun writing about bad movies. I used to think it was bad for my skin." She also wanted to write about movies the way people really talked as they were leaving the theatre. She believed that – and I strongly agree to this point – writing in academic English in an attempt to elevate movies actually lowers them. She quotes, “It denied them what makes them distinctive.”
A fan of classic dancer-comedians like the Ritz Brothers, Pauline Kael, bluntly complains how we all have become a heavy-handed society that wants movies to be about the misery and alienation of our generation. I often wonder, especially in a class like Arts Journalism, if watching – and enjoying – light movies makes me appear less intelligent. People, especially in academic settings like Kalamazoo College, seem to expect a movie to be heavy, turgid and moral, as Pauline puts it.
The slim 126-page book devoted to a real conversation between two friends is more a highlight of her legacy than anything. Definitely interesting and enjoyable, yet, Afterglow has the feel of a finale of a reality TV show.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
When I read that Kael wanted to write about movies the way people really talked about them I had the same response Davis did. It is usually a three to four word statement. There is the good, the bad, and the ugly. Kael obviously does not know the common person, as this is most everyone's response.
I have to disagree with the other commenter, here.
I personally think i've had the most engaging, enlightening conversations about entertainment and art walking out of movies with my friends. the average American's a lot smarter than intellectuals give them credit for, just a little lazy to show it is all.
also: don't feel bad about liking lighthearted movies. My personal favorite film of 2007 was Superbad, even having seen all the so-called critical darlings. the academic community isn't better than anyone's individual taste, just louder.
Who in the hell is "the common person" or "the average American"?
Anyone?
Post a Comment