In a recent article on Tarkovsky, Julian Graffy notes that the Russian journal Kinovedcheskie zapiski (Notes in Cinema Analysis) asked 27 critics from around the world to list the twentieth century's 12 best films «from the point of view of history» and «from the point of
view of film criticism».
Not exact matches
It's no surprise to me that I ventured into the realm
of film criticism, as my determination to
view all
of the
films was typically a solo endeavor.
«I think there was a little bit
of extra critical hate towards it because it's changing the landscape
of the movie business,» he said, «but I think «Bright» is maybe a movie that needs to be reviewed by public opinion rather than
viewed through the highbrow prism
of film criticism.»
At this point in the history
of film criticism, the auteur theory has become passé as a totalizing framework for understanding moviemaking as art, but Martel's three features (and this one in particular), in their distinctive, shared point -
of -
view and unique approach to mise - en - scène and sound, provide irrefutable evidence that international art cinema still serves as a showcase for singular directorial talents who are, indeed, the principal creative forces behind their
films.
It's producer Tom Rosenberg, though, who takes explicit credit for the
film's smarmy self - righteousness: «The other thing for me that was important was to develop a harsh
criticism of the Internet — which reflects my
views.»
That approach to critique can hardly be considered as rational, in the field
of film criticism such public statements are
viewed as lazy and lacking credibility.