Regarding Film: Criticism and Comment (PAJ Books)

Book Description

For over four decades, Stanley Kauffmann's skilled, cultivated, and impassioned film reviews in the New Republic have guided filmgoers and charted the development of the cinema arts. Over the course of his distinguished career, he has been an independent voice in film criticism, challenging preconceptions, skewering pretensions, and championing a wide diversity of films, from Hollywood blockbusters to overlooked gems.

In his latest collection of film writings, Kauffmann discusses the most influential, exciting, and innovative films released since 1993, as well as less successful -- sometimes disastrous -- efforts. From major films by established Hollywood directors (Steven Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan and Oliver Stone's Nixon) to works from the iconoclastic world of independent American film (Neil LaBute's In the Company of Men and David O. Russell's Spanking the Monkey) to the best of world cinema (Abbas Kiarostami's A Taste of Cherry and Erick Zonca's The Dreamlife of Angels), Kauffmann offers his lively and considered views of over sixty films. In other essays, he compares cinematic adaptations of Mozart's operas, explores changing public attitudes toward film as an art form, assesses the possibilities of accurately dramatizing the Holocaust, and recalls the careers of such important figures in film history as David Lean, Billy Wilder, and Akira Kurosawa. A model of provocative writing about the liveliest art, Regarding Film will delight ardent movie lovers everywhere.

Customer Reviews:

Mostly film reviews from the 1990s.......2007-06-27

It is with reluctance and of course some pleasure that I approach a review of a book by a film critic, being a film critic myself. I am not however anywhere near as knowledgeable about film as is Stanley Kaufmann nor am I as fancy with the wordsmithing. What I do well in a haphazard way is react to film as character and story with some reasonable awareness of the politics and the culture of the production. Professor Kaufmann on the other hand is deeply learned about all things cinema.

Regarding Film is a collection of reviews written mostly for The New Republic during the 1990s along with some other pieces from the Yale Review that he calls "Comments," and some movie book reviews. His acidic and sometimes pompous comments can be delightful and insightful, if one agrees with him, or dreary and dreadful and even tedious if one does not. A case in point is his critique of Oliver Stone's Nixon (1996) in which he chirps enthusiastically about Anthony Hopkins's performance while slyly denigrating what I think is one of Stone's finest works. Kaufmann writes, "...despite Stone's mercurial gifts, the film does not become an artistic whole; it remains an examination of characteristics." He adds, "What's missing is what Stone's best films have had: a subtext, a large theme evoked by the action on the screen." Without such a subtext, Kaufmann concludes, the film is "not much more than the series of events presented--thus, in any deep sense, purposeless." (p. 54)

It is good for a movie critic to read a somewhat dismissive review of a film that he the critic found outstanding, because now the critic knows how some readers of his reviews might feel when he disses one of their favs. But what I found annoying here is that in an addendum written a couple of weeks later, Kaufmann tells us that "Another visit to Nixon confirmed my admiration for it as filmmaking..." Well, what is it? I guess it's a "purposeless" exercise in admirable filmmaking! Personally I thought the examination of Nixon the man as opposed to Nixon the politician or Nixon the leader of the free world, was a fine subtext, if you will, with a clear purpose, allowing us to see how Nixon's personality shaped his governance.

More to my liking is Kaufmann's review of Adrian Lyne's Lolita (1998), in which he notes that Lyne's film is truer to the novel than the celebrated Kubrick film from 1962, but not necessarily a better film, and in which he does a nice job of critiquing Jeremy Irons's interesting but melancholy performance. I also liked his review of Shakespeare in Love (1998) and the peripheral knowledge he brought to the review. Also excellent, insightful and interesting to read is his review of The Truman Show (1998). Most of the reviews are in fact interesting to read regardless of how one might feel about his proclivities or analyses.

The most striking disagreement I have with Kaufmann concerns his review of Stanley Kubrick's last film Eyes Wide Shut (1999). I don't think Kaufmann understood the film and I was offended by the eagerness with which he disparages the work of a great artist. Kaufmann even gives us, in a long preamble to the actual review, the apparent reasons for his inability to appreciate what Kubrick was trying to do in his later years. Kaufmann implies simultaneously that he had a falling out with Kubrick over (1) Kaufmann's negative reviews of Kubrick's later films, and/or (2) because Kubrick disappointed Kaufmann on two occasions by not agreeing to some professional invitation that Kaufmann had extended. I find it surprising that Kaufmann could be so blatantly transparent, but maybe I should appreciate his candor.

I was also not pleased with his review of American Beauty (1999). I don't think he understood this film either. He calls it a "supposedly realistic film" (p. 149), but it is not. It is a satire, almost a burlesque, and a very funny one at that. However if a viewer thinks (as did many viewers from middle America who also did not like the film) that it is some kind of attempted realism, then perhaps none of it is very funny.

Curiously this book does not list the films reviewed in a table of contents. The titles appear in an index, but the reader is forced to flip through the book to see which titles are actually reviewed and which are merely mentioned.

Kaufmann's erudition is not to be questioned. His scholar's knowledge of film is admirable and helps to make his reviews very much worthwhile; but his strength as a film critic may be in his understanding and appreciation of actors. I may find fault with his interpretation of a film or his appreciation of a director's artistry, but seldom do I differ with his discernment about the skill and the effort of the actors. As Shakespeare was an actor's writer, Kaufmann is an actor's critic--well, a good actor's critic. He can be quite short with what he sees as a sub par performance.

This charming man.......2002-03-17

For more than four decades Stanley Kauffmann has been the film critic for the New Republic. Now after three decades of the reign of Martin Peretz over that journal he is that rarest of creatures, a truly non-ideological critic. He is consistently sensible and sane, and always worthy to be read. For those who think that Roger Ebert is too vulnerable to the slick products of Hollywood, or that the late Pauline Kael was too voluble and dogmatic, Kauffmann is always available as an alternative.

This collection of reviews covers 1993-2000 and is somewhat more selective than his previous books. There is praise of Abbas Kiarostami and much enthusiasm for Emma Thompson. Michelangelo Antonioni is given a final review, there is a touching obituary for Marcello Mastroianni, and another touching, and very brief, one for James Stewart. Neil LaBute and Todd Solondz are praised for their ruthlessly unsentimental approach. Pulp Fiction is treated somewhat warrily. Forrest Gump goes completely unmentioned. Fargo and All About my Mother get very guarded praise. Eyes Wide Shut and The End of the Affair are subjected to special criticism. Among foreign films Kauffmann singles out for praise Ken Loach, Gianni Amelio, Zhang Yimou, Daniel Bergman's film of his father Ingmar's autobiography, and Erick Zonca.

I find myself disagreeing more with Kauffmann in this collection. I myself do not think that Amistad is a better film than Kundun. Kundun may be excellent, it may be overly respectful, but in my view Amistad is little more than competent and worthy. It strikes me as odd that in American Beauty Kauffmann should praise Annette Bening's acting, since the script caricatures her character as a spiteful gargoyle. (Still, Kauffmann has the movie right: "at the finish of the picture, we're left feeling that Ball has had a trial run with them: now he needs to go back and really use them to some enlightening and organically whole purpose.") At one point in his praise of Schindler's List, he notes the scene of a child hiding in a latrine and says it is mememorable in the same way as the famous photograph of a child being marched away from the Warsaw ghetto. I would argue that Spielberg's shot cannot be memorable as the original photo, since it is obviously been too clearly designed to resemble it. Another weakness of the collection is that there are fewer dismissive reviews. His criticism is actually one of his strengths, as one sees in the pans he wrote last year of Moulin Rouge and The Man Who Wasn't There.

Nevertheless, Kauffmann is an intelligent and literate man, and he is properly pessimistic about the future of film, as the students he tought earlier in the last decade are too impatient and spoiled to recognize the virtues of silent movies, or black and white movies or subtitled ones. They often have no sense of history, either of the movies as an art form or of the wider society. Kauffmann, who quotes Shaw and Graham Greene several times to good effect, is depressed but not desponsdent. And so one should look at, among other things, a fine essay on adapting Mozart to the screen, a surprisingly undeferrential review of Touch of Evil, and a review of the European background and soil of Billy Wilder.

Thoughtful essays on film and more.......2001-06-18

This collection of six years' (1993-98) of thoughtful and passionate criticism (movie reviews and film theory, and related book reviews) is a delight, and a wonderful primer - on thinking and writing about movies. An elegant and informative Foreword by Michael Wood provides biographical material on Stanley Kauffmann, a lifelong theater and film critic, film and theater professor, and essayist.

Kauffmann sent his first (unsolicited) film review to The New Republic in 1958, and has been their film critic since then. Kauffmann : "The mere physical act of film-going is part of the kinesis of my life- the getting up and going out and the feeling of coming home, which is a somewhat different homecoming feeling from anything else except the theater...To have my life unpunctuated by the physical act of film going is almost like walking with a limp, out of my natural rhythm."

This terrific collection has been divided into a few sections: "Reviews," "Reviewings," "Comment," and "Books." The reviews are written deceptively simply, one of Kauffmann's many subtle abilities. He draws you into his view of a film and its possibilities (realized or not) with gentleness and assuredness. He is never noisy, flippant, or condescending. When he objects to something (and he does, often) he lays it out clearly - and humanely. It's a pleasure.

Kauffmann can be funny, too, and has an innate sense of what is worth re-telling. Kauffmann's wonderful review of Kevin Brownlow's biography of director David Lean starts off: "David Lean began life as a dunce. His kindergarten teacher told his mother that she was afraid he would never be able to read and write. He managed to disprove that prediction, buy otherwise there was little sparkle." Of course Lean, raised a Quaker in London, discovered movies at age 13, and everything changed.

Kauffmann eagerly promotes his favorites (Emma Thompson is one, he has much respect for Warren Beatty, and pays close attention to smaller, unsung filmmakers) and is painstakingly fair to actors and filmmakers -in consistently thoughtful uses of his pulpit. He begins his review of a small Iranian film, "Through the Olive Trees," by expressing his thanks to the friend who prompted him to first have a look at its director's work, and then he thanks the director himself. Kauffmann is a man who loves the medium, and reveres its potential to provide hope and transformation - along with a lot of fun.

These great pieces are definitely worth reading and rereading.

Book Description

Here are 23 favorite songs from the turn-of-the-century with lyrics and original sheet-music covers: "Cuddle Up a Little Closer, Lovey Mine," "Harrigan," "Shine on, Harvest Moon," "School Days," and other hits. Introduction.

Average customer rating:

It's OK...just OK though

The King's Gambit: The Opening That Won't Die

The King's Gambit as White
Robert Raingruber , and Lou Maser
Manufacturer: Thinkers' Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Chess | Board Games | Puzzles & Games | Entertainment | Subjects | Books
General | Puzzles & Games | Entertainment | Subjects | Books
Look Inside Entertainment Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

The Fascinating King's Gambit

Winning with the King's Gambit (Volume 2 - Declined)

Winning with the King's Gambit (Volume 1 - Accepted)

Play 1e4 e5: A Complete Repertiore for Black in the Open Games (Everyman Chess)

Silman's Complete Endgame Course: From Beginner To Master

ASIN: 0938650475

Book Description

This is a roadmap for the King's Gambit player. The emphasis is on a positional handling of this venerable opening, complete from the White point of view (which is not to say tactics have been understated).

Every known source has been sifted to present the strongest play by both sides, and all known sideline moves for Black are delved into, in order to fully arm the player of the white pieces. Several new books and a proliferation of KG ideas and games in the past eight years warrant this revised third edition in which the number of illustrative games has more than doubled over the previous edition.

Both accepted and declined variations are covered in detail, including critical rewrites in the important Fischer (1. e4 e5 2. f4 ef4 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4) variation, and the Kieseritzky (1. e4 e5 2. f4 ef4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5), the backbone of our KG.

Customer Reviews:

It's OK...just OK though.......2003-10-24

From a lifelong Kings Gambiteer, I'd have to say I was a bit let down on this book, but it's worth a gander nonetheless.

In my humble opinion, you just have to question a book whose authors have scant expreience in playing the opening which they are writing about...do a database search for Raingruber and the other one and you won't find many results where a King's Gambit is concerned.

They break everything down fine and cover each major line decently, but where a bright spot is found is the fact that they try to explain the ideas behind the varied lines so you get an idea just what is going on...if it weren't for this effort, I'd have given two stars.

What I disagree with is their conclusions and recommendations for many of the given lines...they just don't hit each line fully, leaving out chunks of theory that can be very important...I was especially let down with their treatment of the Kieseritsky.

If you want better, look to the two volume set by Soltis or better yet hunt down an old copy of 'Winning with the Kings Gambit' by Joe Gallagher...it is well worth the hunt!

The King's Gambit: The Opening That Won't Die.......2000-03-24

In de Firmian's Modern Chess Openings, the Grandmaster writes that "the King's Gambit is part of the mythology of chess," a reminder of the romantic 19th century era of attacking chess. Often regarded as unsound at the grandmaster level, the King's Gambit is still a powerful attacking weapon for the other 99.9% of us. The authors have updated their earlier work with new analysis, sample games and tutorial questions. The text covers (in clear prose,well organized variations,readable fonts) all major lines including the Kieseritzky, Philidor, Hanstein, and Muzio lines. Although it is often said that said that the age of swashbuckling chess is over (its hard to swash when they won't buckle), and maybe it is at the higher levels, the rest of us still can learn the art of attack.

Average customer rating:

THE KING'S GAMBIT AS WHITE

Manufacturer: Thinkers Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
ASIN: B000I91JYY

The King's Gambit as White : The Modern way to play the King's Gamit

Average customer rating:

The King's Gambit as White : The Modern way to play the King's Gamit
Larry ; Maser, Lou ; Raingruber, Robert Christiansen
Manufacturer: Thinkers' Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
ASIN: B000MDCI28

Book Description

Recorded history is a finely-woven magic fabric of intricate lies about events predating the sixteenth century. There is not a single piece of evidence that can be reliably and independently traced back earlier than the eleventh century. This book details events that are substantiated by hard facts and logic, and validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient sources.

Customer Reviews:

Calculations are only as good as your numbers.......2007-08-03

Yes, we can all agree that mainstream history is nearly 100% BS due to politics, economics, ego, problems with dating techniques, and various conspiracies. Agreed. But, I've been researching the distinct possibility that human history (in terms of civilizations) are much more ancient than we've been told, so coming across this book was very interesting to me. I wondered how Fomenko could be wrong (if at all) because he is very persuasive in his presentations. Then it dawned on me. If at previous times in prehistory, due to the various catastrophies that are well documented (comets, asteroids, planetary disruptions, plasma discharge, pole reversals, etc) the Earth was in a different position in relation to the sun, different tilt on its axis, different orbit, different rotation (in terms of velocity and DIRECTION), and the continents were in different positions, then would this not cause the ancients to see the sky (constellations) differently? In other words, is Fomenko making erronious assumptions about the physics of the Earth in pre-history, which then corrupt his data with regards to dating the relevant astrology? The last event to seriously disrupt our planet occured roughly 3500 years ago, according to other good researchers, so is it possible Fomenko has been confused by this? The vastly different physics of our planet in the not so distant past may explain this confusion, which is not to say the "mainstream" version of history is correct; on the contrary. I am not an expert in these fields, but wanted to see if this idea could spark discussion.

Pants on fire?.......2007-07-19

Will people ever read before spamming? Yes, Jesuits could not rewrite world history alone, they had help. Anyway, Dr Prof Acad A.Fomenko does not point to jesuits as the driving force of world wide history manipulation in published volumes 1,2,3;, actually he barely mentions the poor devils. Check it with 'Search inside' feature, please. China is rarely mentioned either, in fact, Dr Fomenko is completely eurocentric. Right, his theory contradicts all mainstream schools of history, because in their actual state they are all built on blatantly erroneus chronology. You don't need a mysterious cabal (conspiracy) to falsify history, the falsification is its modus operandi. It is inherent to history(ians) to falsify (distort) events, as it is inherent to humans to boast as it is inherent to power (authority) to legimize itself by referrring to glorious past made to its own order. Dr Prof Fomenko and team have identified scores of instances of such manipulation in Russian, European, etc.. history, and delivered valid statistical proof thereof. His own 'reconstruction' is completely another story. Forget c14 as a valid method of dating. W.Libby has initially discovered a brilliant method of INDEPENDENT dating. Too bad, c14 method has become a joke after a forced marrige with dendrochronology with consensual chronological scale inbuilt. Radiocarbon method can't stand blind tests, but is so very productive as a rubberstamp.

Accepted History & Chronology Must Be Changed. .......2007-04-09

There is no doubt that history as most know it is a sham, & institution's version of History both University & Church is fradulent & inaccurate. Everything was established with an agenda, The real "Dark Ages" are now when we have access to incredible amounts of information past authorities & more important 'common folk' didn't have but our institutions & educators are slow to evolve because of what has ignorantly & arrogantly been taught for too long. This is on many subjects not just Chronology.

For anyone to question "Why would a Mathematician have anything credible to say of History?" The answer is from Dr. Fomenko's preface in the book: "It would be worthwhile to remind the reader that in the XVI-XVII century Chronology was considered to be a subdivision of Mathematics." These volumes could possibly be some of the most important works to date & should be read by everyone with an interest in History, especially professors & educators who have a duty to the public. I have read both books & must say that 'Chronology 1' has some very eye opening & revolutionary information. Even if these volumes are part true the implications are profound & opens the doors to further investigations & questions which must be done. I speak several different lanquages & must say the logic Dr. Fomenko uses with "inflection" of words & words being read from left to right in one region & right to left in another then written backwards, the removal of vowels & get down to basics of words, or different cities & locations having the same name etc. is correct. Vowel usage has always been optional & varied, actually complicating linquistics & study. The first thing one has to understand is that words never had a fixed spelling in history like we do now, the spelling of words was mutable & regional, as well as names & titles of people were vast, varied & changed, NOTHING WAS FIXED or understood linear. Matters of Life & Death as well as financial profiteering yesterday & today were & are made with ignorant, illogical & conspiratorial views of history & reality, it's time people get closer to the Truth & society collectively grow up.

Very Interesting.......2007-03-07

It is a good proposal and I believe it will mature into something even better in the future. I think it deserves to be read.

History as Science Fiction.......2007-01-10

Anatoly Fomenko has written a very intriguing book, full of pictures, charts, and computer 'proof' of his thesis: backwards of AD900 we don't really know what happened or when. Between AD900 and AD1600 there is more certainty, but there is still a lot of fuzzy ground, and things don't get reliable until we get past the 1600's where the printing press made it very difficult for the perpetrators of this timeline manipulation to change anything that had been committed to print. The Dark Ages did not happen. Books were burned for a reason. One organization has doubled the actual length of its existence by expanding the real chronology. Read why.

I had always wondered why Christ died about AD33 and yet men waited until the 11th century to form the Knights Templar, the Cathars, etc and go after the Holy Land by force. Why the 1000 year gap? Turns out there wasn't more than a 10-12 year gap and he proves it using astronomy. This also implies that the planet is not as old as we have been told, and current Christian and other creationist scientists are already championing that idea without being aware of Fomenko's book. The two groups, creationist scientists and the Russian mathematical analysts corroborate each other. Fascinating.

Of course, all this flies in the face of what we have been told traditionally is the 'proper' chronology of western civilization, and most readers will experience 'cognitive dissonance' in reading this book. It means that our history going backwards from AD1600 becomes progressively more incorrect and unreliable until it cannot be trusted at all... in the space of 700-800 years.

Naturally, the curious, open-minded reader will want to know WHO did this, WHY, and did any of the events we think of as really ancient ever happen?
Dr. Fomenko is a respected scientist/mathematician at Moscow State University who has already answered these questions to the satisfaction of his initially skeptical colleagues. Most of them are now believers, a few still refuse to believe (the usual diehards), and of course the western press has ignored Fomenko's work -- for obvious reasons when you read the book. The ones who perpetrated this chronology ruse have a lot to answer for. They are still with us. That's why this book is a well-kept secret.

I gave the book a 4-star rating because I was unable to check out some of his claims; those I checked were as he said. But if even 1/3 of his claims are true, this punches a big hole in what we think is our history, the meaning of western civilization, our educational process (for repeating the ruse as gospel), and the trustworthiness of the organization that perpetrated this ruse, well-intentioned or not.

This book relates to current research into a Young Earth paradigm, to John Keel's discoveries about our planet, and Fr Malachi Martin's insights (in his now out-of-print books). We are indeed sheep who are manipulated and kept ignorant -- for a reason. While knowing what these men have to say may be the "booby prize" (as in: 'what can you do with this knowledge?'), it will provide interesting reading. Didn't someone say: "...and the Truth will set you free."?? For you to judge if this book contains the truth.

Average customer rating:

Common Sense Approach to Rules
Overall good but, very outdated
Not very helpful for business casual
Still Relevant For Today
read it and do what it says

New Women's Dress for Success
John T. Molloy
Manufacturer: Grand Central Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Women & Business | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Fashion & Image | Business Life | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Money Management for Women | Personal Finance | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Self-Help | Health, Mind & Body | Subjects | Books

General | Health, Mind & Body | Subjects | Books

General | Crafts & Hobbies | Home & Garden | Subjects | Books

General | Fashion | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Art Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Business Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Health Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Home & Garden Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0446672238

Customer Reviews:

Common Sense Approach to Rules.......2006-11-10

I think this book is great. I am a young (under 30), short girl. Do you know how hard it is to be taken seriously in an all-male manufacturing environment? These are classy ways to still be a woman and taken like the professional I am. I notice the difference in obeying the rules and then sometimes just wearing whatever I want. This book is valid to my career. I am a Finance Manager, the financial consultant to the business.

Overall good but, very outdated .......2006-11-04

Good overall message about dressing professional but, the clothing styles he writes about are from the 1980's.

Not very helpful for business casual.......2006-11-03

I appreciate John Molloy's research into business clothing; however, this book is only helpful if you work in a company where clothing is not too casual, or if you need to figure out what to wear for job interviews. If every day is "business casual" at your job, this book will help you figure out the best colors and quality, but it won't help you understand what to wear. John advocates always wearing a business-like skirt when possible, and always having a jacket on hand. In my job as a computer programmer, where most men where slacks and polo shirts, this would be too formal.

The book is somewhat repetitive, but it helps to drill the right attitude into your mind - clothes are important, quality is very important, and navy blue is always a good choice. There are a few black-and-white illustrations, but they seem outdated to me.

[...]

Still Relevant For Today.......2006-07-15

I was never a fan of Malloy's books when I first read them in the 1980s and 1990s. But I must admit that his basic principles hold true today. Classic attire is best for interviews and companies (such as pharmaceutical sales) that are still traditional suits-only fields. He is also correct when he says that the fashion industry works against professional attire for women, and that if you are excessively stylish in a corporate setting, you will lose credibility. Changing fashion styles are an incredible waste of money. However, you should disregard the outdated suits, rigid hairstyles and hard attache case in favor of more contemporary classic styles. A better book for that is "Dressing Smart" by Chic Simple Author Kim Johnson-Gross. Moreover, if you work in a creative field, you must not follow the navy & white starched formula of dressing--this could get you demoted. Malloy does mention this point, but doesn't really advise for creative jobs.

read it and do what it says.......2006-03-22

All women should read it and do what it says. As a manager, I know what high importance is placed on presentation. In the workplace today, people have become too casual. Why not do all you can to earn more money, gain more respect and be percieved optimally as a professional? It is very easy for women to make wardrobe mistakes at the office today because of the sexy and casual fashions we see in all the stores. This is a bible for the working woman!

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books