I often enjoy reading movie reviews more than watching the movie they review, even when I do enjoy the movie.
I can't usually describe that well why I did or didn't like a movie, so it's fun when I read a review that does put into words how I felt about it. It gives me a deeper perspective on my own feelings about the movie.
Shout out to Vince Mancini, my personal go to film critic.
My favorite movies review was for a film in the late 90s. The name of the film escapes me, but at the time it had full page ad in the paper with quotes from the review. It said “Watching X like a beach vacation”.
I randomly stumbled upon the full review and the rest of the line was “… and you’re not invited”.
I get this. Often I'll watch a film that seems just "so so". Then, I'll read a review and gain a new appreciation for the film. I'll see things in the film I'd previously missed and understand it in new ways.
Richard Brody of The New Yorker and Ebert's website are particular favorites of mine.
There is reverse of this - have some movie you liked a lot in the past, and show it to somebody who hasn't seen it, ie a date. Suddenly I'll notice little impurities, small missteps, lack of depth of some character or logical error in some reasoning. Maybe the subconscious eagerness to please them and share the experience I've had changes perspective.
I feel similar, but haven't seen a "film" worth a review in ages. It's always the same problems: glacially slow pacing, one-dimensional characters, dialogue and plot insist on injecting politics or memes (that are probably stale by the time it's released), etc.
Do you have any recommendations that aren't that? I just want to watch a real movie made in the last 20 years.
You're right. I wouldn't bother with a review for any comedy. A sense of humor is very fickle and you usually know if you're going to like it ahead of time based on who is involved.
Okay. I'll accept the premise that she was principally an autobiographer through film reviews. But when she was, as the author notes, not a kind or good person, why consume her autobiography?
You did not put quote marks (and were not literal in quoting), so we may interpret that you would not accept advice from non kind people (what?!).
Besides the basic logic that it should be advice from people with good judgement that one should accept, what should instead be revealing and a red alert is
> her enthusiasm for Jean-Luc Godard’s lesser works
Does one often use this basis for consuming autobiographies? I'd rather think the common cause for reading an autobiography is because it is interesting, or because the person is interesting, or notable to history in some way, and you want more insight into their life and way of thinking. I'm admittedly not much for autobiographies myself, and the only memoir I actively chose to read was Napoleon's, but my choice to read it certainly wasn't because I thought he was a kind person.
I often enjoy reading movie reviews more than watching the movie they review, even when I do enjoy the movie.
I can't usually describe that well why I did or didn't like a movie, so it's fun when I read a review that does put into words how I felt about it. It gives me a deeper perspective on my own feelings about the movie.
Shout out to Vince Mancini, my personal go to film critic.
My favorite movies review was for a film in the late 90s. The name of the film escapes me, but at the time it had full page ad in the paper with quotes from the review. It said “Watching X like a beach vacation”.
I randomly stumbled upon the full review and the rest of the line was “… and you’re not invited”.
I get this. Often I'll watch a film that seems just "so so". Then, I'll read a review and gain a new appreciation for the film. I'll see things in the film I'd previously missed and understand it in new ways.
Richard Brody of The New Yorker and Ebert's website are particular favorites of mine.
There is reverse of this - have some movie you liked a lot in the past, and show it to somebody who hasn't seen it, ie a date. Suddenly I'll notice little impurities, small missteps, lack of depth of some character or logical error in some reasoning. Maybe the subconscious eagerness to please them and share the experience I've had changes perspective.
Maybe you just like reading stuff more than watching stuff.
I think it's my stage of life (40s with kid) where finding the time to watch a movie is often too hard. But reading the review is only a few minutes.
I feel similar, but haven't seen a "film" worth a review in ages. It's always the same problems: glacially slow pacing, one-dimensional characters, dialogue and plot insist on injecting politics or memes (that are probably stale by the time it's released), etc.
Do you have any recommendations that aren't that? I just want to watch a real movie made in the last 20 years.
Highly likely we'll have different tastes, but the last two movies I watched were The Drama and Pillion. Greatly enjoyed them both.
Just a heads up, maybe don't watch Pillion with your parents/kids though...
You're right. I wouldn't bother with a review for any comedy. A sense of humor is very fickle and you usually know if you're going to like it ahead of time based on who is involved.
Bridge of Spies (2015)
A war movie... yes a theme is emerging from these replies. Thanks for assisting making my point.
I enjoyed reading this review of movie reviews
Okay. I'll accept the premise that she was principally an autobiographer through film reviews. But when she was, as the author notes, not a kind or good person, why consume her autobiography?
Do you only read autobiographies, and by extension, blog posts/novels/etc. by people you morally agree with?
You did not put quote marks (and were not literal in quoting), so we may interpret that you would not accept advice from non kind people (what?!).
Besides the basic logic that it should be advice from people with good judgement that one should accept, what should instead be revealing and a red alert is
> her enthusiasm for Jean-Luc Godard’s lesser works
Because she was smart, and her reviews will make you think.
Does one often use this basis for consuming autobiographies? I'd rather think the common cause for reading an autobiography is because it is interesting, or because the person is interesting, or notable to history in some way, and you want more insight into their life and way of thinking. I'm admittedly not much for autobiographies myself, and the only memoir I actively chose to read was Napoleon's, but my choice to read it certainly wasn't because I thought he was a kind person.
there is an archive of her reviews here: https://www.geocities.ws/paulinekaelreviews/
it’s not the best way to browse reviews at random however