MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Picturing “Illuminating The Shadows” Film Critic Conference, April 21-23

You Should Read One Of Us

Illuminating the Shadows: Film Criticism In Focus” was the subject of a conference April 21-23, Easter weekend, at the Block Museum of Art on the Northwestern University Evanston campus. Four panels were accompanied by four screenings, including Michael Phillips‘ choice of Errol Morris’ Tabloid; Dave Kehr‘s presentation of “the pre-Codiest of pre-Code” movies, Raoul Walsh’s 1933 three-cannon salute of a carefree sexual romp, Sailor’s Luck; and Karina Longworth with Athina Rachel Tsangari’s Attenberg (my notes here). There aren’t any images here of the panel about this history of film criticism in Chicago that I was part of, but the organizers promise MP3s of the four panels to come. My favorite moment may have come when a film professor type confronted the above panel with the question of why he should read any film criticism at all, what was its purpose, why should he care about anyone’s opinion but his own. To which the Boston Globe’s Wesley Morris essentially replied, “Read one of us.” (His elaboration of how a reviewer’s work can inform the intelligent reader was substantially more nuanced.) To the right of Morris, the Chicago Tribune’s Michael Phillips; The AV Club’s Scott Tobias and Ignatiy Vishnevetsky of “Ebert Presents” and Mubi.com. A 52-photo slideshow including these images and others is here; all could bear a bit more color correction to make the assembled seem ever-so-slightly more healthy.

Rosenbaum

Jonathan Rosenbaum.

Flowchart linking Carpenter, DePalma by Vishnevetsky

At dinner, Vishnevetsky crayons his flowchart to connect John Carpenter and Brian De Palma.

Longworth

Karina Longworth of LA Weekly.

Empaneled: "Past Perfect – Critical Histories, Seminal Touchstones, and Rediscoveries"

The Block Museum of Art auditorium during a panel dubbed “Past Perfect–Critical Histories, Seminal Touchstones, and Rediscoveries.” To the left, moderator Nick Davis (Assistant Professor, English and Gender Studies, Northwestern).

Phillips

Michael J. Phillips.

Kehr, Rosenbaum

Dave Kehr, Jonathan Rosenbaum.

Nehme, Klinger

Farran Nehme Smith, “The Self-Styled Siren“; critic-curator Gabe Klinger. FNS makes a point about being precise. I like to imagine she’s pressing the bell button outside a Lubitschian boudoir.

Kehr

Dave Kehr.

Phillips

Michael Phillips.

Sachs

Ben Sachs, Cine-File.

Longworth

Karina Longworth.

Well y'know

Fred Camper, Dave Kehr, Farran Nehme Smith. (FNS is caught mid-blink; not in mid-nod.)

Vishnevetsky, Foundas

Vishnevetsky, Associate Program Director of the Film Society of Lincoln Center Scott Foundas. Not pictured: Time Out Chicago’s Hank Sartin, Freelance writer Andrea Gronvall,  Christy LeMaster (contributor, Eight Forty-Eight, WBEZ 91.5 FM; Cine-File; and Director of the Nightingale Theatre); J. R. Jones (Staff Writer, Chicago Reader); Ben Kenigsberg (Film Editor, Time Out Chicago); Ray Pride (Film Critic, Newcity; News Editor, Moviecitynews.com); Ed M. Koziarski (Filmmaker; Writer, Chicago Reader, Reel Chicago, Time Out Chicago);  Bill Stamets (Freelance writer, Chicago Sun-Times, Newcity).

Tobias, Vishnevetsky, Lemaster, Kenigsberg, Crouse, Longworth, Phillips, Foundas, Kehr

After Day Two: Tobias, Vishnevetsky, Lemaster, Kenigsberg, Edward Crouse, Longworth, Phillips, Foundas, Kehr.

“Special support for this program is provided by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Tribeca Flashpoint Media Arts Academy, the Rubens Family Foundation, and the Office of the Provost, Northwestern University.”

Be Sociable, Share!

2 Responses to “Picturing “Illuminating The Shadows” Film Critic Conference, April 21-23”

  1. Laurent says:

    Any notes or feedback from what was said about Serge Daney and Manny Farber in the Past Perfect session on the 22nd?

  2. Ray Pride says:

Movie City Indie

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon