I am the movies editor for Goings On About Town and the author of “Everything Is Cinema: The Working Life of Jean-Luc Godard.”
New York, New York
- Tweets 46,918
- Following 3,403
- Followers 73,296
- Likes 10,332
Word on why the oh-so-neat Fatherland is Masterpiece Theatre for intellectual types:
newyorker.com/culture/the-fr…
1
2
17
2,159
Red River, tonight at @QuadCinema at 7:30pm, introduced by Karina Longworth; word below about the violence that Hawks found implied in the casting of Montgomery Clift opposite John Wayne:
Reminder that Red River plays a central role in Howard Hawks's work because the casting of Montgomery Clift opposite John Wayne unleashed new visions of violence (and how to stylize them); on @tcm at 3am (ET):
newyorker.com/culture/richar…
3
22
7,879
Strange, great, rare Chabrol, Les Godelureaux (The Fops, a.k.a. Wise Guys), from 1961, despised then when not merely disdained (except by the far-sighted Cahierists), one of his best, because freest, films, at @lallianceny today at 4 and 7 (scroll down:
newyorker.com/culture/richar…
6
24
1,899
Dragonwyck, a longtime favorite, is coming to @criterionchannl in November (short word here, longer one below) newyorker.com/goings-on-abou…
Joseph Mankiewicz directed one of the great and belated first features, Dragonwyck, from 1946, a historical-gothic fusion of Tocqueville and Poe, involving upstate New York politics in the eighteen-forties; on @tcm at 2pm (ET):
newyorker.com/culture/the-fr…
7
3
21
2,735
Very curious how You Can See Everything will be received internationally (seeing some dates set for the next little while):
imdb.com/title/tt45368240/re…
3
1
52
6,632
When Nathan Fielder is mean to Elizabeth Holmes, I see it as expressing disdain for her crimes and avoiding being Wolfied—criticized like Martin Scorsese for The Wolf of Wall Street, for seeming too sympathetic to a fraudster; it hasn't worked, for the same misguided reasons:...
10
14
729
67,426
We are on the same page: newyorker.com/culture/the-fr…
Anti-spoiler hype is a marketing psyop that perpetuates the gamification of movies! There’s more to good art than the thrill of surprise! Free your minds!
4
23
311
22,419
I think it's very interested in the type, for reasons I discuss in my review.
Why is the film so aggressively uninterested in exploring Holmes as a *type* of person? Her relationship to the truth is not original, that's what they sound like. It's specifically modeled on Steve Jobs. The movie thinks she fell out of a coconut tree.
2
8
264
34,941
Silent frenzy: Dovzhenko's Zvenigora @AnthologyFilm 12:30pm (sorry for delay) and Murnau's Faust, @MovingImageNYC 3:30pm (and the subject of The Murnau Bible, a sumptuous new volume of vast historical interest, published by @mubi ):
newyorker.com/culture/richar…
newyorker.com/goings-on-abou…
3
10
2,916
I had an invigorating conversation with Naomi Fry and @mimbsy about You Can See Everything (below); footnote: after seeing it, I still wasn't sure what I had seen, and my second viewing was still filled with surprises—in other words, the entire movie isn't a spoiler for itself:
5
10
191
17,302
Translation: worship and adoration aren't useful critical positions. No kidding. The point is that Kael is here belittling critical appreciation of directors, written in detailed and thoughtful pieces though it may have been, not as useful criticism but as worship and adoration.
This worship of the director is cyclical—Welles or Fellini is probably adored no more than von Stroheim or von Sternberg or De Mille was in his heyday—but such worship generally doesn’t help in sorting out what went into the making of good pictures and bad pictures. (1971)
3
5
87
7,705
I'll have the pleasure and the honor of talking with filmmaker David Greaves & co-producer Liani Greaves after tonight's 7pm screening @FilmForumNYC of William Greaves's Once Upon a Time in Harlem—an instant classic that brings history vividly to life now as it did in real time.
1
10
66
5,515
Very little about railway schedules, very little data, but those details may be all that gets through to an already-closed mind.
SHOAH accumulates data compulsively; you learn more and more about the railway schedules, but your vision becomes narrower. The film is exhausting to watch because it closes your mind. (1985)
3
6
208
14,459
A noteworthy bit of Godardiana, at @lallianceny at 6:30pm, that I've only read about: Sauve la vie (qui peut), a reconstruction by Michael Witt of Godard's 1981 montage of Every Man for Himself with reels from earlier classics by Eisenstein, Keaton, Visconti, and Wajda.
21
2,873
Word on spoilers and a fascinating spate of new releases that deal cagily with dramatic form and the dispensing of key details, for better or worse:
newyorker.com/culture/the-fr…
6
76
5,816