Those Were The Days
I've been waiting to see Gerald Peary and Amy Geller's For The Love of Movies: A History of American Film Criticism for a long time. It's been in the works for years. So many, in fact, that one of the talking heads appears as a young, lean-faced guy with a shock of dark hair (in footage that was shot around 2000) and as an older, fuller-faced guy with less hair. Happens to all of us, but this may be a first. Same interview subject, two biological incarnations.
Anyway, For The Love of Movies -- directed and written by Peary, produced by Geller -- is finally here and it does the job nicely. Which is to say intelligently, competently, lovingly and, after a fashion, comprehensively. Meaning that it tells the story as thoroughly as the budget and running time have allowed. For those who don't know much about the lore of the realm, it's nutritious food and then some.
It's a hell of a subject -- a chronicle of magnificent obsessions and magnificent dreams, and a rise-and-fall story covering scores of critics, the entirety of the Hollywood film culture from the '20s to the present, and hundreds if not thousands of movies.
Ideally (and this is no slag on Peary or Geller) For The Love of Movies should have been a well-funded, six-part American Experience series on PBS, shot on 35mm by Emmanuel Lubezski, and including a vast smorgasbord of film clips donated by their copyright owners as a gesture of thankfulness. (Today's production and marketing community may resent critics, but they owe them big-time.)
But Peary and Geller's low-budget, hand-to-mouth approach will do for now. I'm very glad it was made, glad that I saw it. I hope others follow suit when it has its big debut on Monday, 3.16, at South by Southwest, and more particularly at the Alamo Ritz at 8 pm. And then on Wednesday, 3.18 at the same venue. And again on Saturday, 3.21, at the Alamo Lamar 3 at 4 pm.
Gerald Peary (l.) and Amy Geller (r.) with unknown female.
You can't watch this film and not acknowledge that Peary and Geller are fully up to the task of providing a clean and cogent history lesson. Could they have made a snarkier, trippier excursion piece? A more poetic and probing cultural epic or tone poem...whatever? Yeah, probably, but they were budgetarily constrained and wanted to reach the not-very-hip (or moderately hip) crowd.
So they've thrown together an easy-to-digest, chapter-by-chapter saga of the last 90 years of American film criticism, starting in the mid-to-late teens with the emergence of Frank E. Wood, the first "cricket" to earn his stripes by investing a modicum of personal passion and a writerly point-of-view, and hiking all the way through Vachel Lindsay, Robert Sherwood, the great seminal trio of Otis Ferguson, James Agee and Manny Farber, the 20-year reign of Bosley Crowther, the fall of Crowther over his Bonnie and Clyde review, the influence of Cahiers du Cinema and the auteur theory, the resultant reign of Andrew Sarris and The American Cinema, the huge influence of Pauline Kael and the writings of Stanley Kaufman, Vincent Canby, Richard Corliss, Richard Schickel, Molly Haskell, Roger Ebert, Stuart Klawans, etc.
This feels like Billy Joel's "We Didn't Stop the Fire." I'm hearing a film-critic spoof version of the lyrics. Come to think, a mock music-video interlude would have been a great thing for Perry and Geller to run with -- seriously.
Gleiberman, Hoberman, Harlan tell-it Jacobson.
John Powers, Elvis Mitchell, Leonard Maltin, mumblecore.
Titanic, Janet Maslin, Wesley Morris, David Sterritt.
Ain't-It-Cool, Rex Reed, Nesselson and junket whores.
Lisa Schwarzbaum, Orson Kane, Indies in the '90s.
Wilmington, Weinberg, Siskel and Szymanski.
Ruby Rich, Kenny T., tits and zits, Anthology Film Archives.
I've lost the rhythm, can't get it right, haven't the time. Anyone?
For whatever reason Perry and Geller don't mention the great French critic Andre Bazin. (Or at least not that I remember. He's not listed in this cast roster.) Nor do they mention John Simon, whom I always regarded as a brilliant (if occasionally cruel) critic and one of the major go-to guys of the '60s, '70s and '80s. Or Todd McCarthy, Dwight McDonald, Bertrand Tavernier, Andy Klein, Armond White, Ty Burr, Glenn Kenny, Anthony Lane, Scott Foundas, etc.
There are a lot of holes and gaps -- let's face it. The doc only runs 80 minutes. A longer length (115 or 120 minutes, say) would have obviously allowed for a more comprehensive summary.
For those who know a lot about the American film-critic monastery, For the Love of Movies is a tidy and agreeable canoe ride down memory creek. With a tinge of melancholy, I should add, although this comes more from my own feelings.
Peary and Geller, to put a point on it, have chosen not to emphasize the dominant reality facing established film critics in the 21st Century -- i.e., the extinction of the monk-like film critic cabal as it was known and defined from the late 1930s and '40s to the beginning of this century, and the drop-by-drop decline and diminishment of the power and prestige of the traditional film critic. Which is due, obviously, to the winding down of the Gutenberg era, blah blah. With some critics and columnists adapting to the new technological climate (ahem) and some not so much.
Peary and Geller acknowledge that it's currently a sink-or-swim, do-or-die reality out there. They begin by saying that "film criticism is a profession under siege" and that "according to Variety 28 film critics have lost their jobs in the last several years." That, of course, is dated information and isn't the half of it. Sean P. Means' disappearing film critic list is currently at 49. MCN's Last Film Critics in America list has the names of 121 who are still collecting a check.
Clearly we're looking at the end of the road here, certainly for the elite culture portrayed in the film.
The prime kiss-of-death factor is a diminished interest among today's tweeting, texting, 24/7 digital-feed generation in being passive recipients of the views of learned, brahmin-like, know-it-all film critics dispensing ivory-tower insights. Economic issues aside, the firing of film critics is rooted in today's common-currency belief that everyone and anyone with a computer or hand-held device knows as much as those snooty-ass critics do. Or certainly that their opinion is just as valid, and that they prefer a more democratic, interactive bloggy-blog conversation as the dominant mode of dissection and discussion.
In short, there's a whole current of lament than runs underneath this story that probably should have been explored with more frankness and feeling.
For The Love of Movies is narrated by Patricia Clarkson. I don't want to be a crank, but I would have preferred to hear a raspy, whiskey-tinged male voice tell the tale. The voice of someone who sounds like he might have personally lived through some of the history. Michael Wilmington would have worked in this respect.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on March 13, 2009 at 3:58 PM
comment #1
Mr. Muckle
says ...
And you don't think that "a more democratic, interactive," and participatory conversation is a great, thankful-we've-finally-got-one, undiluted good thing--not counting a few dozen professional pontificators who've lost their jobs? In what other field beside your own do you not think this is a great thing? Religion? Politics? Jeez-louise, to call it a tragedy is classic narcissism.
Do we have a better idea (or the possibility of having one) of what's going on now in, say, government than we did in 1955? I say we definitely do, not that it has yet permitted us to change a great deal. Perhaps you would prefer something like Pravda than a democratic and interactive conversation.
You use the words "snooty critics" to suggest that such a childish criticism is the worst one could say of them, but leaches, hangers-on, and wanna-be's could also be added, among other surface-level epithets.
I submit that the only value the legion of critics have ever contributed is a degree of entertainment on their own merits, through clever writing, perhaps (see Ebert et al). That the film industry remains a mountain of crap with a few jewels spit out here and there, is THE RESULT of decades of film criticism. That's indisputable and a fact. You can say it would be worse without it--and THAT would be an opinion.
Facts are facts: Citizen Kane pioneered the use of deep focus lenses. Opinions are a different kind of beast. The word "valid" doesn't really enter into it. "I enjoyed it," is in the realm of fact. "You will enjoy it, too," is an opinion. Opinions have no validity at all, they stand apart from that in another category altogether, whether you can marshall a truckload of facts besides.
Because great bundles of film critics have failed to understand this distinction and have tried to turn that ignorance into power and influence and employment and money, is a good enough case for their extinction in my book.
And this is not a dismissal of Mr. Wells, who entertains and educates on his own merits. But his opinions can go right in the trash can as far as I'm concerned.
Posted by Mr. Muckle
at March 14, 2009 8:52 AM
comment #2
George Prager
says ...
Mr. Muckle: Bite a fart.
Posted by George Prager
at March 14, 2009 9:06 AM
comment #3
701
says ...
George Prager,
It's depressing to watch a discussion on HE degenerate from reasonably thoughtful discourse to playground name-calling in the space of a single post.
If you disagree with Mr. Muckle, I would be interested in reading why. You've been the source of fairly insightful commentary in the past. As for taunts, insults, and flame wars, I believe HE would be better off without them.
Just my opinion, tho'.
Posted by 701
at March 14, 2009 10:25 AM
comment #4
BurmaShave
says ...
" the firing of film critics is rooted in today's common-currency belief that everyone and anyone with a computer or hand-held device knows as much as those snooty-ass critics do. Or certainly that their opinion is just as valid, and that they prefer a more democratic, interactive bloggy-blog conversation as the dominant mode of dissection and discussion."
I find this very odd coming from someone such as yourself on a site like this.
Posted by BurmaShave
at March 14, 2009 10:42 AM
comment #5
Jeffrey Wells
says ...
Wells to Burma Shave: What are you talking about? I agree that any one person's view is as valid as any critic's, and it's the back and forth argument format of HE that has made it highly popular. (Among other factors.) So what are you on about?
Posted by Jeffrey Wells
at March 14, 2009 11:08 AM
comment #6
Mr. Muckle
says ...
Upon reflection, I have realized that saying "the film industry remains a mountain of crap" is an opinion. As such, it has no value in the context. But, it was a sop to sensationalism, no doubt. Also, it cannot be said that, even if it is a mountain of crap, film criticism cannot be held responsible for it. It can only be said that despite film criticism, we've still got what we've got.
Prager probably has a dog in this fight and doesn't realize that his dog is dead.
Posted by Mr. Muckle
at March 14, 2009 11:12 AM
comment #7
BurmaShave
says ...
Yeah Wells sorry I read the piece wrong. I thought you were in concordance with the lamenting of the loss of the ivory towers. Sort of slow on the uptake this afternoon. You can see how that would have confused me.
Posted by BurmaShave
at March 14, 2009 11:16 AM
comment #8
CitizenKanedforChewingGum
says ...
"So many, in fact, that one of the talking heads appears as a young, lean-faced guy with a shock of dark hair (in footage that was shot around 2000) and as an older, fuller-faced guy with less hair. Happens to all of us, but this may be a first. Same interview subject, two biological incarnations."
I thought Lisa Schwarzbaum looked different!
I keed.
Posted by CitizenKanedforChewingGum
at March 14, 2009 11:44 AM
comment #9
George Prager
says ...
701: You know what to do.
Mr. Muckle: If it wasn't for Siskel and Ebert, I never would've seen Massacre at Central High
BurmaShave: Stay away from the cheese cracker peanut butter sandwiches in the candy machine at your work. They may be contaminated with salmonella.
Posted by George Prager
at March 14, 2009 11:53 AM
comment #10
JohnCope
says ...
"... any one person's view is as valid as any critic's."
In theory or principle if not in actual application.
Posted by JohnCope
at March 14, 2009 12:26 PM
comment #11
701
says ...
Mr. Prager,
Perhaps you should consider posting over at Ain't It Cool News, where your wit and insight will be more keenly appreciated.
Posted by 701
at March 14, 2009 12:31 PM
comment #12
BurmaShave
says ...
Prager I prefer to make my own, with finely aged spinach. Excellent points all.
Posted by BurmaShave
at March 14, 2009 12:41 PM
comment #13
George Prager
says ...
I love when newbies like 701 think they can take me on. Great idea, BurmaShave, maybe you can start a business making gourmet peanut butter and cheese cracker sandwiches. They can sell them at Trader Joe's.
Posted by George Prager
at March 14, 2009 12:50 PM
comment #14
Jeffrey Wells
says ...
Prager, 701 and Burma Shave are obviously aware that this adolescent spat argues against the proposition that the typical online cool cat is just as knowledgable, impassioned and persuasive in his/her film-loving mania as any film critic. The film critics I know wouldn't dream of wallowing in this schoolyard level of discourse. In fact, they would most likely comment on the substance of my review, and on the issues that the doc raises and which I took some time to explain. Imagine that!
Posted by Jeffrey Wells
at March 14, 2009 1:16 PM
comment #15
701
says ...
Mr. Prager,
I still don't understand how, specifically, you take issue with Mr. Muckles's argument, posted above.
"If it wasn't for Siskel and Ebert, I never would've seen Massacre at Central High..." is the extent of your remarks.
Honestly -- I'm not interested in getting into an alpha-male pissing match with you.
My hope in chiding you was that this thread would stay focused on the original topic, and not devolve into yet another instance of internet-based primate chest thumping.
For what it's worth, I made the mistake of falling for your bait. You seem to have wanted to pick a fight, and now you've succeeded. Congratulations.
Jeff's original post had to do with the history of film criticism in America. Do you have anything interesting of insightful to say on that topic? If so, I sincerely look forward to reading it.
Posted by 701
at March 14, 2009 1:21 PM
comment #16
701
says ...
Jeff,
You're right.
I should've stuck to the topic at hand.
Lesson learned.
Over and out.
Posted by 701
at March 14, 2009 1:24 PM
comment #17
George Prager
says ...
You know who gave good discourse? Dwight MacDonald. I recommend his "On Movies" to anyone who wants to read some great film criticism. His takedown of biblical epics is a classic, as is his review of THE SOUND OF MUSIC (I think he walked out in the middle...go Dwight!). And his review of Kael's "I Lost it at the Movies" is also one for the ages (Kael singles him out for criticism), he basically tells her to bite a fart. So, yes, the history if film criticism is a lively topic, with lively personalities and I'll definitely see this flick when it comes out. They were put this together at WGBH Boston, so it should show up on PBS at some point.
Posted by George Prager
at March 14, 2009 1:25 PM
comment #18
Deathtongue_Groupie
says ...
I did think the use of quotes from, ahem, film critics in the trailer was questionable. Film critics like a movie about film critics? Wow, really? Ebert gives high marks to movie that stars... Ebert? Stop the presses, boys!
Seriously, they should get some well respected and articulate filmmakers to weigh in instead.
As to Prager, I too wish he would piss or get off the pot.
For every one post he makes that has a valid, thoughtful point, there are 10 - no, make that 20 - schoolyard snarky BS ones that tell us he doesn't get enough attention in real life.
Posted by Deathtongue_Groupie
at March 14, 2009 1:43 PM
comment #19
George Prager
says ...
Who does?
Posted by George Prager
at March 14, 2009 2:29 PM
comment #20
berg
says ...
I asked Peary if he had considered using the clip of the alien Siskel & Ebert from the ending of THEY LIVE ... he replied: "There are lots of Ebert-Siskel quotes in movies, and at one time we thought of a montage of them. But it just couldn't fit into the narrative--we were always getting rid of tangents which just didn't quite work."
well worth watching more than once, especially for the pre-WWII coverage ...
Posted by berg
at March 14, 2009 2:33 PM
comment #21
lipranzer
says ...
I am sorry they don't include McDonald - while he was a bit too snobbish for my tastes, he was a brilliant writer and critic, and could be very funny as well - I have his review of THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD in a film textbook, and it's hysterical reading.
Posted by lipranzer
at March 14, 2009 7:44 PM
comment #22
free online games
says ...
Such a valuable article.. Thank you very much for spreading this article...
Posted by free online games
at March 18, 2010 12:28 PM
comment #23
egipt
says ...
egipt
turcja
Chorwacja
cypr
last minute
czarnogora
dominikana
dahab
hurghada
bułgaria wakacje
bułgaria autokarem tanio
Bułgaria
marsa alam
sharm el sheikh
taba
emiraty arabskie
grecja
grecja autokar
grecja samolot
chalkidiki
kreta
korfu
Kos
riwiera olimpijska
Rodos
zakynthos
Hiszpania
fuerteventura
gomera
lanzarote
majorka
teneryfa
gran canaria
bali
Izrael
Jordania
karaiby
kenia
Kuba
malediwy
malta
maroko
mauritius
meksyk
portugalia
Azory
madera
seszele
sri lanka
hawaje
tajlandia
tunezja wycieczki
djerba
hammamet
monastir
sousse
krym
wenezuela
margarita
włochy
algarve
bahama
brazylia
zanzibar
egzotyka last minute
wycieczki objazdowe
Rejsy
wycieczki dla singli
wakacje rodzinne
riwiera turecka
alanya
side
varadero
phuket
Costa Brava
dubaj
punta cana
puerto plata
Kusadasi
wakacje autokar 2011
wakacje dojazd własny 2011
wakacje samolot 2011
bony turystyczne
dalmacja
istria
ciepłe kraje
wycieczki grupowe
narty austria
Posted by egipt
at December 6, 2010 1:50 AM
comment #24
istanbulhotel
says ...
istanbul hotels
istanbul airport
transfer
Posted by istanbulhotel
at February 24, 2011 3:59 AM
comment #25
istanbulhotel
says ...
istanbul hotels
istanbul airport
transfer
Posted by istanbulhotel
at February 24, 2011 4:01 AM
comment #26
alarmes
says ...
alarmes
Posted by alarmes
at February 25, 2011 3:23 AM
comment #27
youtube converter mp4
says ...
Thanks for your patience and sorry for the inconvenience!
Best regards, Mary, CEO of mp3 from youtube and install windows 7 on iscsi
Posted by youtube converter mp4
at March 1, 2011 2:07 AM
comment #28
alarmes
says ...
desbloquear telemoveis
Posted by alarmes
at March 5, 2011 9:46 AM
comment #29
alarmes
says ...
desbloquear telemoveis
Posted by alarmes
at March 5, 2011 9:49 AM
comment #30
free pc games
says ...
really great share! thanks a lot
affiliate review
free pc games download
Posted by free pc games
at May 17, 2011 8:22 PM
comment #31
kerry
says ...
Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of storage area network training
Posted by kerry
at June 1, 2011 1:13 AM