Events

More Panels About Critics and Food

By September 24, 2008No Comments

Okay, not food. And okay, it’s just one pan­el. I’m read­ing an Eno bio­graphy at the moment, whaddya want from me.

This Saturday the Film Society of Lincoln Center’s hav­ing a pan­el on every­body’s favor­ite sub­ject, the future of film cri­ti­cism, entitled “Film Criticism In Crisis?” on this Saturday the 27th, 1 p.m., at the Walter Reade theat­er. This pan­el, mod­er­ated by Film Comment’s Gavin Smith, has a refresh­ing inter­na­tion­al perspective—in addi­tion to its American con­tin­gent, the great Kent Jones, the great Jonathan Rosenbaum, the near-great Jessica Winter, and the mys­ter­i­ous Acquarello, the pan­el also fea­tures Emmanuel Burdeau, edit­or of the belea­gured Cahiers du Cinema, Suung-hoon Jeong, one-time crit­ic for the Korean film weekly Cine 21, and in a rare appear­ance in these parts, American-in-Berlin David Hudson of the estim­able GreenCine Daily.

Should be fun. If you hear a guy heck­ling “Fuck you and Manny Farber” from the back of the hall, I’d expect that’d be Steven Boone. Okay. I really have to stop. 

More info on the pro­gram is here.

UPDATE: A mutu­al friend of Mr. Boone and myself mildly chided my snark in an e‑mail. He’s right to. Truth to tell, Boone belongs on this pan­el; like it or not, he’s bring­ing some­thing new to the table, pas­sion­ately. He’d get some sparks fly­ing up there.

No Comments

  • Dan says:

    What about Detroit? What about Houston? What about Pittsburgh, PA?
    Damn you for what you’ve star­ted. The pan­el sounds inter­est­ing, cer­tainly, I doubt I’ll be in the area but if I am, I’ll make time. 🙂

  • Josh Ralske says:

    Damn, I wish my friends wer­en’t get­ting mar­ried Saturday. Idiots. Glenn, oth­ers attend­ing, please fill us in on how things went…

  • Bill C says:

    Is it just me, or do crit­ics spend more time talk­ing about the state of cri­ti­cism these days than actu­ally, y’know, writ­ing some. I mean, it’s a navel-gazing sport by nature, but these summits–whether held vir­tu­ally, on the page, or in movie theatres–are start­ing to become a form of satire.

  • Herman Scobie says:

    Just a caveat about the “great­ness” of Kent Jones. He is clearly very know­ledge­able but car­ries with him, espe­cially on his posts at Dave Kehr, a smug sense of superi­or­ity to all us peasants.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    I dunno Herman. Kent’s crit­ic­al voice is pretty assured, but I don’t find him smug in the least—not as a crit­ic, not as a blog com­menter, not as a per­son. Then again, there are more than a few folks out there who con­sider ME smug, so maybe what do I know?
    Speaking of Dave Kehr’s blog, that Michael Worrall char­ac­ter has really been stink­ing up the place, alas. There are some things worse than smug­ness, genu­ine or perceived.

  • dfear says:

    Herman, you should read Physical Evidence, the col­lec­tion of Kent’s essays that Wesleyan pub­lished sev­er­al months back. Besides the fact that it’s essen­tial read­ing, it’s proof pos­it­ive that his writ­ing is any­thing but smug. Scholarly and assured, yeah; smug, not quite.

  • lichman says:

    i’d go, but i have to hold down the fort at Grassroots.
    Pro Tip: Grassroots Tavern is where you should always get drunk and dis­cuss film before scream­ing at each oth­er and get­ting into a fist fight.

  • Michael Worrall says:

    Mr. Kenny, I do not wish to “stink-up” your blog, but appar­ently I am not the only one who takes issue with Kent Jones’ hubris, as Herman Scobie noted. How is a crit­ic­al voice “assured” when the per­son proudly pro­claims not to look at his writ­ing for consistency?