Here's something you might be interested in.
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
The movie critic's measuring stick
Richard Brody's top 10 list is not the same as mine, which is fine, but also interesting.
To the Wonder
I overheard a fellow critic at a screening recently saying what a terrible year it had been for movies. His conversational fellows seemed to agree.
I haven't been playing the critical game long enough to argue the point, but I did chuckle when I saw The New Yorker's Richard Brody open his essay on the best movies of 2013 with the sentence, "The year 2013 has been an amazing one for movies, though maybe every year is an amazing year for movies if one is ready to be amazed by movies." He went on to conclude that "The top ten is unusually tops," while "the second ten could easily be another year's top ten."
Brody is delighted because, you see, "the best movies this year are films of combative cinema, audacious inventions in vision. The specificity and originality of their moment-to-moment creation of images offers new ways for viewers to confront the notion of what 'narrative' might be. Their revitalization of storytelling as experience restores the cinema to its primordial mode of redefining consciousness." [Emphasis mine.]
Here's the thing about critics: it's not that we have different tastes, though of course we do. It's that we have different metrics. I suppose that when a film stays with me for days, when this or that scene demands that I mull and brood until I've made sense of it, then my consciousness has been redefined in some way. But not, I think, in the way Brody means.
Brody writes that 2013's best films comprise a "collective declaration of the essence of cinema." Whoa. And what is the essence of cinema, Mr. Brody? "An art of images and sounds that, at their best, don't exist to tell a story or to tantalize the audience (though they may well do so) but, rather, to reflect a crisis in the life of the filmmaker and the state of the artist's mind or, even, soul."
Richard Brody
There you have it: art is a window (or maybe a mirror) to the soul of the artist. That is its essence. That is Brody's metric. It helps to explain some of the more interesting selections on his list: The Canyons, say. Or Inside Llewyn Davis. Or The Bling Ring. (It does nothing that I can see to explain why The Wolf of Wall Street shares top billing with To the Wonder, but he and I are both under embargo on Wolf, so I'll say no more.)
I disagree. I think art is supposed to show us the world through the artist's eyes. Not for the sake of understanding the artist, but for the sake of understanding the world in a way we otherwise would not. I want the artist's stamp on the work; I really do. But I also want him to point beyond himself.
I'm sure there are all sort of arguments against my view of art, but I'm not interested in proving myself right. I'm just interested in pointing out the vast difference in metric between Brody and me. We come out with different measurements for the year's best films because we're using different yardsticks. Or rather, he's using a yardstick and I'm using a scale.
All this is my way of sidling up to the fact that the San Diego Film Critic's Society has released their list of nominations for the best of 2013. I'm a first-year member of the Society (thanks, good people!), and so I kept my suggestions for this list relatively few. But looking at it, it seems clear that there are different metrics among San Diego's critics as well. I think this is something Scott and I will dig into in 2014.
(But holy cow, how cool is it that Brody had the gumption to put Computer Chess and Upstream Color in his top 10? I thought they were both very good, and seeing them there makes me wonder if he isn't on to something when he talks about "audacious inventions in vision" being part of what makes a film "best.")
Here's something you might be interested in.
The movie critic's measuring stick
Richard Brody's top 10 list is not the same as mine, which is fine, but also interesting.
The movie critic's measuring stick
Richard Brody's top 10 list is not the same as mine, which is fine, but also interesting.
To the Wonder
I overheard a fellow critic at a screening recently saying what a terrible year it had been for movies. His conversational fellows seemed to agree.
I haven't been playing the critical game long enough to argue the point, but I did chuckle when I saw The New Yorker's Richard Brody open his essay on the best movies of 2013 with the sentence, "The year 2013 has been an amazing one for movies, though maybe every year is an amazing year for movies if one is ready to be amazed by movies." He went on to conclude that "The top ten is unusually tops," while "the second ten could easily be another year's top ten."
Brody is delighted because, you see, "the best movies this year are films of combative cinema, audacious inventions in vision. The specificity and originality of their moment-to-moment creation of images offers new ways for viewers to confront the notion of what 'narrative' might be. Their revitalization of storytelling as experience restores the cinema to its primordial mode of redefining consciousness." [Emphasis mine.]
Here's the thing about critics: it's not that we have different tastes, though of course we do. It's that we have different metrics. I suppose that when a film stays with me for days, when this or that scene demands that I mull and brood until I've made sense of it, then my consciousness has been redefined in some way. But not, I think, in the way Brody means.
Brody writes that 2013's best films comprise a "collective declaration of the essence of cinema." Whoa. And what is the essence of cinema, Mr. Brody? "An art of images and sounds that, at their best, don't exist to tell a story or to tantalize the audience (though they may well do so) but, rather, to reflect a crisis in the life of the filmmaker and the state of the artist's mind or, even, soul."
Richard Brody
There you have it: art is a window (or maybe a mirror) to the soul of the artist. That is its essence. That is Brody's metric. It helps to explain some of the more interesting selections on his list: The Canyons, say. Or Inside Llewyn Davis. Or The Bling Ring. (It does nothing that I can see to explain why The Wolf of Wall Street shares top billing with To the Wonder, but he and I are both under embargo on Wolf, so I'll say no more.)
I disagree. I think art is supposed to show us the world through the artist's eyes. Not for the sake of understanding the artist, but for the sake of understanding the world in a way we otherwise would not. I want the artist's stamp on the work; I really do. But I also want him to point beyond himself.
I'm sure there are all sort of arguments against my view of art, but I'm not interested in proving myself right. I'm just interested in pointing out the vast difference in metric between Brody and me. We come out with different measurements for the year's best films because we're using different yardsticks. Or rather, he's using a yardstick and I'm using a scale.
All this is my way of sidling up to the fact that the San Diego Film Critic's Society has released their list of nominations for the best of 2013. I'm a first-year member of the Society (thanks, good people!), and so I kept my suggestions for this list relatively few. But looking at it, it seems clear that there are different metrics among San Diego's critics as well. I think this is something Scott and I will dig into in 2014.
(But holy cow, how cool is it that Brody had the gumption to put Computer Chess and Upstream Color in his top 10? I thought they were both very good, and seeing them there makes me wonder if he isn't on to something when he talks about "audacious inventions in vision" being part of what makes a film "best.")
Comments