Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by Robert Harris, Nov 28, 2018.
Wasn't Adler a huge backer of Cassavettes' "Faces" during the NYFCC voting that year ?
I thought I recalled she was pushing for Shame, but to storm out because your choice isn't the winner is the epitome of sour grapes/sore loser in my view. Seems like Shame did win the National Society of Film Critics' vote.
I watched "Sister George" last night expecting the worst... image wise. The PQ was a quantum leap over the DVD. For me it looked great .
I saw it opening day ( A Christmas release ) in a 1200 seat theater.( sold out) It was my first X rated film.
I enjoyed watching it with a better understanding than I did at 16.
Susannah York was a great actress.
Now you know why she was senior film critic at the NY Times for only one year !
I did some research this morning, and you are absolutely right. She was a big supporter of Faces; that was the film she resigned her membership over when it came up short in the voting.
She was also extremely angry and condescending .
I had the good fortune to meet Kael briefly in the late 1970s when she came to give a lecture at UC Berkeley and I can assure you she was anything but angry (unless you confuse passion with anger). She was actually rather demure but she was blunt which offends people when that bluntness is aimed at their movie darlings. That's what I loved about her. She wasn't hesitant about shooting down sacred cows and critics darlings and believe you me, she trashed some of my all time favorite movies too. I also knew two of her close friends (one of them cited several times in Kael's biography A Life In The Dark) who regaled me with Kael stories (which I won't repeat since they were told to me in confidence) and she was a fascinating complex woman.
As for condescending, let's be honest. Some people (and movies) deserve to be condescended to.
She lectured at a film history class I took at USC (in SC, not CA) and, as Thomas said, she was blunt but I found also a trifle nervous to be the focus of so many eyes. I read every book of hers (since I wasn't a subscriber of The New Yorker throughout her long tenure there, I bought the books to make sure I hadn't missed anything) and the biography, too.
She was astute and insightful, but she had her pets and prejudices like all critics do, and I found her much less knowledgeable about musicals (my favorite genre) than about other genres so her opinions on those were often, I felt, misdirected, misinformed, or misguided. But you can't be an expert on everything.