tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post114811780647838010..comments2024-03-24T13:26:57.317-07:00Comments on Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule: CHEWING ON WALTER CHAWDennis Cozzaliohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01954848938471883431noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-75095937809369386952011-03-05T12:28:17.434-08:002011-03-05T12:28:17.434-08:00I am part of those critics against the new movie v...I am part of those critics against the new movie versions..<br />I hate them... Poseidon is a waste of money, time and film..<br />and it's just the begining... <br />King Kong is the next one.. it was THE classic of classics and now destroyed for me!!miami web designhttp://www.compusource.net/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-57975057908486714972010-09-22T14:30:13.284-07:002010-09-22T14:30:13.284-07:00I've tried to read many (by which I mean more ...I've tried to read many (by which I mean more than twenty) of Chaw's reviews. The problem is that I'm usually more pissed off than he always is by the time I'm done. I am in no way saying he's not intelligent or without a cogent point of view. What I AM saying is that he's a contrary, pretentious douchebag. This is merely my opinion, of course, but I hold this particular one very strongly. Simply because you have an excellent vocabulary at your demand and are proficient in its use does not make you insightful or even interesting. <br /><br />Chaw reminds me of Armond White in that he seems to only want to rip apart whatever everybody else seems to like. I don't care that he enjoyed Batman Begins; using the phrase "my uninspired eyes" in his review for Inception, while remarkably stupid, must make him feel like he's standing apart from all the rest. Sadly, all he's done is paint himself as an obnoxious asshole.A.J. Mullernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1149196520929588372006-06-01T14:15:00.000-07:002006-06-01T14:15:00.000-07:00And Hostel is homophobic because at the end, the c...And Hostel is homophobic because at the end, the creepy Dutch businessman who paid to torture and kill someone was himself murdered in a public toilet. Not because he tortured and killed the guy's friend, but because he was a faggot. Right, Walter?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148696475928312312006-05-26T19:21:00.000-07:002006-05-26T19:21:00.000-07:00By the way, I thought X-Men was pretty sweet. I t...By the way, I thought X-Men was pretty sweet. I thought that Chaw didn't really add anything to the discussion, he slams the movie on lines that just don't matter (believability of superpowers and fight scenes) among other things, and seems to find bigotry in nearly every movie, even ones that overtly try to avoid it. You have to try pretty hard to say that a movie which is a thinly vieled metaphor for the persecution of homosexuals is homophobic. There are some lows, Halle Berry pretty much the whole time, but for what it was I was very entertained.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148683327788197072006-05-26T15:42:00.000-07:002006-05-26T15:42:00.000-07:00And I should say, when he's not going off on one o...And I should say, when he's not going off on one of these rants against commercial juggernauts like <I>The Da Vinci Code, X Men 3</I> and <I>Poseidon</I>, Chaw is still a perceptive critic whom I enjoy reading. I'm just tired of the ranting. He's just taking advantage of an opportunity to vent without restraint against films which are probably the least affected, positively or negatively, by a film review. I'm sure Chaw imagines himself as the lone voice of reason against a tide of puff pieces and studio-generated publicity, and he's not wrong to feel that he (and, yes, others) are swimming against a pretty strong tide in the face of these kinds of pictures. But the kind of tune-out Chaw generates with such a hostile attitude is no kind of trade-off, in my view.Dennis Cozzaliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01954848938471883431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148682353288805492006-05-26T15:25:00.000-07:002006-05-26T15:25:00.000-07:00Thanks, Filmbrain. I value your thoughts on this m...Thanks, Filmbrain. I value your thoughts on this matter greatly. I'm a bit dazed by the attention from the <I>Vue Weekly</I>, but it is nice to get such a supportive write-up and know that there are others who appreciate the work that I/we do.<BR/><BR/>As for Film Freak Central, I just wonder if Chaw's brand of chest-puffery, as practiced by him and many others, hasn't done more to turn people off of wanting to read real, honest film criticism than just about anything else. It seems to me a critic can be smart, authoritative and knowledgeable without having to denigrate anything and everyone in his path in order to make himself look like king of the intellectual hill. I look to your site and the many others linked on my sidebar as irrefutable proof of this. <BR/><BR/>I have no idea if Walter Chaw has read the piece or not-- if he has, he hasn't left any indication of it here. But, curiously, a friend of mine pointed out to me last night that Chaw started out-- <I>started out</I> his review of <I>X Men 3</I> by labeling Brett Ratner "a homophobic, misogynistic, misanthropic moron." So much for levelheaded discourse.Dennis Cozzaliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01954848938471883431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148505780843771992006-05-24T14:23:00.000-07:002006-05-24T14:23:00.000-07:00Dennis --First off, congrats on the Vue article. I...Dennis --<BR/><BR/>First off, congrats on the Vue article. It's great to see an online critic get that kind of (well-deserved) recognition.<BR/><BR/>I can only hope that Walter Chaw has read this excellent reaction/response to his recent interview. In reading the piece, I realized that I'm confused as to exactly who Chaw is writing for. A well-written smackdown of <B><I>Failure to Launch</I></B> might be a fun read, but is he merely preaching to the choir? Will people <I>not</I> see the film based on his review? Are the people who would consider seeing a film like that readers of Film Freak Central in the first place? <BR/><BR/>I admire the honesty in the piece vis a vis your immediate reaction to the interview. Neither snarky nor fueled by emotion, it's a well thought out, reasoned response to Chaw and some of his gripes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148270738900449412006-05-21T21:05:00.000-07:002006-05-21T21:05:00.000-07:00K: Back in the '80s, when I first started writing ...K: Back in the '80s, when I first started writing reviews for the only paid gig I ever had doing so, I used to think that writing bad reviews was easy and more fun, and that writing good reviews, being able to cogently express what moved me or otherwise led me to believe what I'd seen had value, was much harder. But with about another 20 years of life under my belt since then, I've come to agree with your point of view: writing reviews of bad films can be fun and cathartic, but it can also be a dead-end-- how worked up, after all, do you really need to get over <I>Cannonball Run II</I>? (I remember working up a righteous fury over it for my newspaper the weekend it came out.) It's much more fun now, more challenging, more worth my time, and yes, easier, to try to capture what it is that makes a film expand in my head and spur on my imagination and thought processes, even if it's a film that might not obviously require a lot of thought and experience to appreciate.<BR/><BR/>And just for the record, just so everything's out in the open, I liked <I>The Dukes of Hazzard</I>, and, yes, I had fun writing about it. I'll skip, for now, thinking about whether I think anyone would want to read <I>that!</I> :)Dennis Cozzaliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01954848938471883431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148270239920139112006-05-21T20:57:00.000-07:002006-05-21T20:57:00.000-07:00Roscoe: As I said to Flickhead above, I like the f...Roscoe: As I said to Flickhead above, I like the fact that Chaw is passionately opinonated too. I hope that my comments really didn't suggest otherwise. What I objected to was the form those opinions took <I>in the interview itself</I>. I felt that he came across as rude and intolerant of the opinions of others and, yes, unnecessarily arrogant. It seemed to me that he spent too much of the interview talking about the insufficiencies of other writers, especially his Internet brethren, by whom he seems fairly threatened. If he was going to go down that road, I'd have appreciated him pointing out some of the other writers he's aware of who do good work in the Online Film Critcis Circle, or elsewhere on the Net, instead of suggesting that he's in the slim 1% of those writers who deserve serious consideration, by fellow writers, reader and the studio heads who set up his screenings.<BR/><BR/>As for your comments about his ego, of course Chaw has a big one, as does most everyone who decides to his/her observations about any art have value and attempts to write about them with applied intelligence. But in this context (I'm not talking about Chaw's writing here) I don't agree that Chaw's ego and arrogance have served him well. Maybe they have in getting him the work he has, and the inroads to other areas of experience he states that the job of film critic has provided him. But if Chaw's own standards (as applied in his example of Pauline Kael) are to be at all trusted, then the way a professional treats people, in print, in person, in an interview situation, does carry some importance. I'm not saying that because Walter Chaw came off like an ego-driven, arrogant jerk during some portions of that interview, then it follows that his writing is no good. Quite the opposite. I wouldn't even say that because of what I found distasteful in that interview that Walter Chaw obviously <I>is</I> an ego-driven, arrogant jerk outside of the interview situation. How could I know that? And how do I know that there weren't unknown factors going on that influenced the emphasis and tone he put on certain subjects that he addressed? Maybe in person his manner and composure indicated an entirely different read on his comments (ever had the tone or intent of an e-mail misinterpreted?). <BR/><BR/>I appreciate and respect your comments, Roscoe, especially since they go against the grain of the general tone of my response and those of others. Although I think you're wrong to take my response to the Chaw interview as the launching of a crusade against arrogance, ego and pretentiousness, I do reserve the right to talk about these things if I feel they adversely affects the text of a film or my experience with it, or if they get in the way of anyone, myself included, leaving themselves open to the wisdom and good writing available within the work of any given film critic.Dennis Cozzaliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01954848938471883431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148268449337260382006-05-21T20:27:00.000-07:002006-05-21T20:27:00.000-07:00Girish, Peter, TLRHB: I got home very late last ni...Girish, Peter, TLRHB: I got home very late last night from the drive-in and didn't see these comments until quite early this morning. This article was, to say the least, very much unexpected. I was flabbergasted when I read David Hudson's link and then the article itself. It's exceedingly strange to read things like this about oneself, and I don't know any other way to react but to say thanks to you guys for your words and for pointing it out to me. Best movie critic on my block/side of the street/in my house, maybe. North America? Well, I don't think Matt Zoller Seitz, David Edelstein, Charles Taylor, Stephanie Zacharek, Manohla Dargis Walter Chaw or Jonathan Rosenbaum have anything to worry about. But you'd better watch your ass, Richard Roeper!Dennis Cozzaliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01954848938471883431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148195608062431862006-05-21T00:13:00.000-07:002006-05-21T00:13:00.000-07:00Hey Dennis, add my congrats, that was quite a nice...Hey Dennis, add my congrats, that was quite a nice write up you got in Vue Weekly. Especially next to that big ad for the Sex, Love and Lust Issue!The 'Stachehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03426658288145524160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148179300729818322006-05-20T19:41:00.000-07:002006-05-20T19:41:00.000-07:00Congratulations on being cited by Vue Weekly.Congratulations on being cited by Vue Weekly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148175933282691272006-05-20T18:45:00.000-07:002006-05-20T18:45:00.000-07:00Dennis: I really cannot imagine any higher praise ...Dennis: I really cannot imagine <A HREF="http://daily.greencine.com/archives/001951.html" REL="nofollow">any higher praise than this!</A><BR/>My hearty and warm congratulations!!girishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05079328617099035797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148173405801376232006-05-20T18:03:00.000-07:002006-05-20T18:03:00.000-07:00It was interesting to read your thoughts (and ever...It was interesting to read your thoughts (and everyone elses) about film criticism.<BR/><BR/>My own current philosophy is to just stick to writing about things I like and want to share with others. I don't really have the time & energy to rant much about the films I dislike. I'd rather spend that time & energy writing about the ones that excite me and remind me why I love movies.<BR/><BR/>And really... who wants to read another negative review pointing out the obvious reasons why something like The Dukes of Hazard movie sucks? I know I don't, but I might be in the minority.Kimberly Lindbergshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17605498572070631516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148168492582381562006-05-20T16:41:00.000-07:002006-05-20T16:41:00.000-07:00I've lobbed a few stones at Mr. Chaw on occasion; ...I've lobbed a few stones at Mr. Chaw on occasion; however I've always left my name and contact address, for responses, which I've gotten.<BR/><BR/>I generally like his work, but there has been the occasional review where I've had to wonder if we've even seen the same films (case in point; the recent remake of TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE). One can pick up the pungent stench of a bitter wind over some of the recent reviews and posts, and I do feel bad for him, to expend a lot of time and energy on a form that, when one really gets down to it, is pretty much subjective and is generally at mercy of whatever the moviegoer's mood is.<BR/><BR/>I appreciate film criticism, esp. good criticism - but the older I get, I generally have shifted towards the "I like what I like, damn the reasons why" method of film appreciation, and I would imagine that would have to really stick in a critic's craw. (no GET SMART pun intended).L. Rob Hubbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11539336724694374785noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148156397998714912006-05-20T13:19:00.000-07:002006-05-20T13:19:00.000-07:00Sal: The interesting thing is, the experience of t...Sal: The interesting thing is, the experience of the inteview made have made me read Walter Chaw's writing even more carefully, but I will still read him because I think he's generally very good at what he does. So I don't think my opinion of him <I>as a writer</I> has much changed. What was disconcerting to me was all this bile floating to the surface in the interview, which I think he must have an easier time tempering within his reviews (though I did look back at his review of <I>Million Dollar Baby</I> again last night, and I don't know if I'm just overly sensitive about this movie or what, but it did seem snottier than I recall.) I still think Walter Chaw is a good, smart writer worth reading-- the interview has just made me want to look a little closer at his writing from now on.<BR/><BR/>Flickhead: Chaw's passion is definitely one of the things I value most in him as a writer. I'd rather read someone who's got something invested in what he saying than a bunch of milquetoast copy written by someone who's too timid to take any chances. But I read a lot of film blogs, like yours, or Zach Campbell's, or Michael Smith's, or Matt Seitz's, or several others, and I get that passion without the curdled condescension that seems to often accompany writers like Chaw. I can do without name-calling and, to use Filmbrain's term, adolescent pissing contests when I want to read a serious consideration of a film. If I want to read a bunch of goofballs whipping it out over <I>Mission: Impossible 3</I>, I'll head to <I>Ain't-It-Cool-News</I>. But I don't!<BR/><BR/>TLRHB: Yeah, that's why I kinda of stayed away too. I thought about dropping a line or two, but then it kind of mushroomed into what you see here. I felt my feelings were well enough represented by you, Filmbrain, and Sean Burns anyway. Like I said above, call me an old fogey (I'm 45), but at this point in my life I'd rather have a civil conversation with people I respect than sit around tossing molotov cocktails in order to show off my way with a pithy turn of phrase and an opinion that goes against the grain.Dennis Cozzaliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01954848938471883431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148154164684663842006-05-20T12:42:00.000-07:002006-05-20T12:42:00.000-07:00You know, Dennis, I refrained from getting too muc...You know, Dennis, I refrained from getting too much into this over at the House Next Door for the same reasons that I think are underlying your lengthy intervention here. What I loved about discovering your site and many others here was their maturity, deep enthusiasm for film and their ability to have a civilized disagreement. So, the bottom line: Chaw might want to think about how he's coming off. My guess is some of this was chest-thumping and showing off for the fun of it. He's a writer with an ego, and he ain't the only one around here. But if the response he gets makes him think a little and apply it to his writing, you've done your job.The 'Stachehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03426658288145524160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148151270792026142006-05-20T11:54:00.000-07:002006-05-20T11:54:00.000-07:00He's Mexican?He's Mexican?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148148919861687582006-05-20T11:15:00.000-07:002006-05-20T11:15:00.000-07:00Borderline Personality Disorder:http://www.nimh.ni...Borderline Personality Disorder:<BR/><BR/>http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/bpd.cfm<BR/><BR/>(Note that psychologists generally believe that every personality disorder corresponds with a not-quite-as-serious personality "style," so calling someone a "borderline personality" is not the same as saying they have BPD.)The Wrong Boxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11525871621986041165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148145685313650272006-05-20T10:21:00.000-07:002006-05-20T10:21:00.000-07:00Perhaps you could've titled this essay, "What's in...Perhaps you could've titled this essay, "What's in Walter's craw?" But, please, avoid tacky allusions to old episodes of <I>Get Smart</I> (re: "Not <I>craw</I>! Klaw!"), for they would be woefully outmoded.<BR/><BR/>Walter's passionate ire is heartwarming and nostalgic, and not without a touch of dementia. Should we send him the hotline number of Alcoholics Anonymous? Surely there's some potion greasing the wheels of that loose cannon.<BR/><BR/>I pity anyone seriously invested in film criticism nowadays. When Kael and Sarris were making it chic, at least they were dipping into a vast well that included new releases by Kurosawa, Antonioni, Buñuel, Bergman, Polanski, Truffaut... But today, what is there to jazz the critic or the public?<BR/><BR/>With occasional (and rare) exceptions, most contemporary filmmakers have revealed themselves to be preoccupied with recreating the (better) work of their predecessors.<BR/><BR/>Walter's heated delivery feels shaded by adolescent idealism. I don't know his age, but if he's behaving like this at fifty, call the men with the nets.Uncle Gustavhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08501032829800803300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148143180201096192006-05-20T09:39:00.000-07:002006-05-20T09:39:00.000-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Uncle Gustavhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08501032829800803300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1148141355787034262006-05-20T09:09:00.000-07:002006-05-20T09:09:00.000-07:00I for one having spent some time with you and unde...I for one having spent some time with you and understanding a little about the person you are, I have to say with all honesty that you are, Mr. Cozzalio what you write. You are honest and sincere with your opinions and you are also willing to accept changing your opinion when presented with a valid argument.<BR/><BR/>Often you will find writers or people with the willingness to sit back and critic others are sometimes not as truthful as they seem. You and I know from experience that there are some people willing to trumpet their own horn yet do nothing to garner such praise. Or worse than that, there are people who seem to run in the same vein as the rest of us yet they turn out to be very different.<BR/><BR/>It's refreshing to hear your honest reaction to being presented with evidence that has changed your opinion about someone you once held some value for.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com