Bred Any Good Rooks Lately?

FlakeNoir

Hedda Gabler said:

FlakeNoir said:

Hedda Gabler said:

Started reading When The Lights Go Down by Pauline Kael. 

She is a movie critic that was highly respected. She is caustic and acerbic. 

So, why is that? Why was she so respected? How did she make a living off of being brutal to creatives ? 

An average Joe Blow gives a negative opinion about a book or movie and they are disregarded as uninformed or uneducated or they didn’t “get it.”  Someone influential like Kael could say the exact same thing and people would agree or disagree. And she’d make money for her loathing. 

Maybe it’s delivery. She uses big fancy ideas and words. I guess when you say someone’s acting sucks or their idea sucked in such a creative way, it makes it okay. 

Really interesting read. I’ve already disagreed with her on almost everything, but, i do see what she is saying every time. 

I don't know why she would garner a following initially, maybe people in the business enjoyed a different perspective?
Of course once she had some small popularity, people just seem to flock to that. Celebrity? 

Yes, it must be celebrity. All critics are just that, but these celebrity critics make huge money with prestigious careers saying the same stuff average people say too. It’s just a fascinating hypocrisy ? 

It's crazy how humans decide what and who is more important than the next person, why are we drawn to people like that? Why is celebrity so important?

FlakeNoir

Sort of thinking specifically about the Jimmy Savile situation. (didn't they notice he had his real character right there in his surname?)

Hedda Gabler

FlakeNoir said:

Hedda Gabler said:

FlakeNoir said:

Hedda Gabler said:

Started reading When The Lights Go Down by Pauline Kael. 

She is a movie critic that was highly respected. She is caustic and acerbic. 

So, why is that? Why was she so respected? How did she make a living off of being brutal to creatives ? 

An average Joe Blow gives a negative opinion about a book or movie and they are disregarded as uninformed or uneducated or they didn’t “get it.”  Someone influential like Kael could say the exact same thing and people would agree or disagree. And she’d make money for her loathing. 

Maybe it’s delivery. She uses big fancy ideas and words. I guess when you say someone’s acting sucks or their idea sucked in such a creative way, it makes it okay. 

Really interesting read. I’ve already disagreed with her on almost everything, but, i do see what she is saying every time. 

I don't know why she would garner a following initially, maybe people in the business enjoyed a different perspective?
Of course once she had some small popularity, people just seem to flock to that. Celebrity? 

Yes, it must be celebrity. All critics are just that, but these celebrity critics make huge money with prestigious careers saying the same stuff average people say too. It’s just a fascinating hypocrisy ? 

It's crazy how humans decide what and who is more important than the next person, why are we drawn to people like that? Why is celebrity so important?

Exactly.  Sycophants are fun to watch too. You think, could you possibly get further up someone’s ass?  Have an opinion. Have a different opinion.  

Hedda Gabler

FlakeNoir said:

Sort of thinking specifically about the Jimmy Savile situation. (didn't they notice he had his real character right there in his surname?)

Good example. Everyone was so blinded or purposely obtuse because he was celebrity. He could get people noticed, invited to things. He raised so much money. 

Anyone else weird like him would have been shunned. He made this persona at the right time. 

He #metoo’ed a whole nation. 

Kurben

Hedda Gabler said:

FlakeNoir said:

Hedda Gabler said:

Started reading When The Lights Go Down by Pauline Kael. 

She is a movie critic that was highly respected. She is caustic and acerbic. 

So, why is that? Why was she so respected? How did she make a living off of being brutal to creatives ? 

An average Joe Blow gives a negative opinion about a book or movie and they are disregarded as uninformed or uneducated or they didn’t “get it.”  Someone influential like Kael could say the exact same thing and people would agree or disagree. And she’d make money for her loathing. 

Maybe it’s delivery. She uses big fancy ideas and words. I guess when you say someone’s acting sucks or their idea sucked in such a creative way, it makes it okay. 

Really interesting read. I’ve already disagreed with her on almost everything, but, i do see what she is saying every time. 

I don't know why she would garner a following initially, maybe people in the business enjoyed a different perspective?
Of course once she had some small popularity, people just seem to flock to that. Celebrity? 

Yes, it must be celebrity. All critics are just that, but these celebrity critics make huge money with prestigious careers saying the same stuff average people say too. It’s just a fascinating hypocrisy ? 

I dont know about that. I think far too many critics nowadays just praise the film. Great acting and directing and so on. Maybe it was the same in her day? In that case i totally understand why she was both popular and divisive. I remember she was one of few, possibly the only, critic at the time that praised The Warriors by Walter Hill. It later became a cult classic and is now seen as a great action movie but then it was neglected. I think she became popular because she spoke her own mind and if she thought a hit movie was not very good she said so straight out like she did with Sound Of Music and Bonnie and Clyde and several others. I personally think critics, of both books and movies, are too nice. If you think something is crap, say it and let others disagree. Considering she started in the 60,s i dont think celebrity critics was a thing. I think many that disagreed with her enjoyed her reviews because they were honest and well expressed. I think i remember she got fired several times because of being too caustic but there was always another newspaper that wanted her reviews. 

Hedda Gabler

Kurben said:

Hedda Gabler said:

FlakeNoir said:

Hedda Gabler said:

Started reading When The Lights Go Down by Pauline Kael. 

She is a movie critic that was highly respected. She is caustic and acerbic. 

So, why is that? Why was she so respected? How did she make a living off of being brutal to creatives ? 

An average Joe Blow gives a negative opinion about a book or movie and they are disregarded as uninformed or uneducated or they didn’t “get it.”  Someone influential like Kael could say the exact same thing and people would agree or disagree. And she’d make money for her loathing. 

Maybe it’s delivery. She uses big fancy ideas and words. I guess when you say someone’s acting sucks or their idea sucked in such a creative way, it makes it okay. 

Really interesting read. I’ve already disagreed with her on almost everything, but, i do see what she is saying every time. 

I don't know why she would garner a following initially, maybe people in the business enjoyed a different perspective?
Of course once she had some small popularity, people just seem to flock to that. Celebrity? 

Yes, it must be celebrity. All critics are just that, but these celebrity critics make huge money with prestigious careers saying the same stuff average people say too. It’s just a fascinating hypocrisy ? 

I dont know about that. I think far too many critics nowadays just praise the film. Great acting and directing and so on. Maybe it was the same in her day? In that case i totally understand why she was both popular and divisive. I remember she was one of few, possibly the only, critic at the time that praised The Warriors by Walter Hill. It later became a cult classic and is now seen as a great action movie but then it was neglected. I think she became popular because she spoke her own mind and if she thought a hit movie was not very good she said so straight out like she did with Sound Of Music and Bonnie and Clyde and several others. I personally think critics, of both books and movies, are too nice. If you think something is crap, say it and let others disagree. Considering she started in the 60,s i dont think celebrity critics was a thing. I think many that disagreed with her enjoyed her reviews because they were honest and well expressed. I think i remember she got fired several times because of being too caustic but there was always another newspaper that wanted her reviews. 

Yes, she is very honest. I have been cherry picking reviews of movies I know but I will read them all.  She doesn’t mince words, that’s for sure. So far, the reviews I’ve read have not been flattering, but she does have a way of not flattering. 🙂

i agree kurben. I think everyone is too quick to be blasé. Not that anyone needs to be an ogre about it, but just be honest.  I didn’t like it and this is why. Or this was brilliant, here’s why I thought that.   And a critic can like and dislike all sorts of things in the same book or film.  He/she/they doesn’t  have to think a product has to be all bad or all good. 

Kurben

Hedda Gabler said:

Kurben said:

Hedda Gabler said:

FlakeNoir said:

Hedda Gabler said:

Started reading When The Lights Go Down by Pauline Kael. 

She is a movie critic that was highly respected. She is caustic and acerbic. 

So, why is that? Why was she so respected? How did she make a living off of being brutal to creatives ? 

An average Joe Blow gives a negative opinion about a book or movie and they are disregarded as uninformed or uneducated or they didn’t “get it.”  Someone influential like Kael could say the exact same thing and people would agree or disagree. And she’d make money for her loathing. 

Maybe it’s delivery. She uses big fancy ideas and words. I guess when you say someone’s acting sucks or their idea sucked in such a creative way, it makes it okay. 

Really interesting read. I’ve already disagreed with her on almost everything, but, i do see what she is saying every time. 

I don't know why she would garner a following initially, maybe people in the business enjoyed a different perspective?
Of course once she had some small popularity, people just seem to flock to that. Celebrity? 

Yes, it must be celebrity. All critics are just that, but these celebrity critics make huge money with prestigious careers saying the same stuff average people say too. It’s just a fascinating hypocrisy ? 

I dont know about that. I think far too many critics nowadays just praise the film. Great acting and directing and so on. Maybe it was the same in her day? In that case i totally understand why she was both popular and divisive. I remember she was one of few, possibly the only, critic at the time that praised The Warriors by Walter Hill. It later became a cult classic and is now seen as a great action movie but then it was neglected. I think she became popular because she spoke her own mind and if she thought a hit movie was not very good she said so straight out like she did with Sound Of Music and Bonnie and Clyde and several others. I personally think critics, of both books and movies, are too nice. If you think something is crap, say it and let others disagree. Considering she started in the 60,s i dont think celebrity critics was a thing. I think many that disagreed with her enjoyed her reviews because they were honest and well expressed. I think i remember she got fired several times because of being too caustic but there was always another newspaper that wanted her reviews. 

Yes, she is very honest. I have been cherry picking reviews of movies I know but I will read them all.  She doesn’t mince words, that’s for sure. So far, the reviews I’ve read have not been flattering, but she does have a way of not flattering. 🙂

i agree kurben. I think everyone is too quick to be blasé. Not that anyone needs to be an ogre about it, but just be honest.  I didn’t like it and this is why. Or this was brilliant, here’s why I thought that.   And a critic can like and dislike all sorts of things in the same book or film.  He/she/they doesn’t  have to think a product has to be all bad or all good. 

Absolutely. I remembered once i wrote a review about The Lionking that was published in a big swedish newspaper. I was not flattering. I did write some nice things about but i also pointed out how unoriginal it was and how they basically must have said to eachother lets remake Bambi but move the setting from a forest to the savanna, change the deer into a lion and add an evil uncle (which was the only original character in the movie and also by far the best).

About reviews there are too many buddy reviews nowadays whose main goal seem to be to making it to the movieposter or the bookcover of the next edition. Which makes the reader (me) feel like whats the point of reading a review anymore if they just write good things? I know from experience that very far from all books and movies are great.

Hedda Gabler

Good for you for staying true to your opinion of Lion King.  People can get rabid if you disagree. We all see art differently. And that’s okay. 

Kurben

Thats how it should be.

GNTLGNT

....agreed to all above.....a turd is a turd, even if you clothe it in Dior and sprinkle it with Chanel....and I've made it abundantly clear over time, that I don't give a rat's ass about what a critic thinks....if I like it, I like it.....I don't need their "guidance"....

Hedda Gabler

Alice Adventures in Wonderland. 

So far, most of the story seems to be pretty darn close to the animated disney movie version I remember.  A change here or there.  Once I finish it, I’ll find another audio of Through the looking Glass. 

These public domain unabridged books may be the way to go for a bit. 

GNTLGNT

Hedda Gabler

Hedda Gabler said:

Alice Adventures in Wonderland. 

So far, most of the story seems to be pretty darn close to the animated disney movie version I remember.  A change here or there.  Once I finish it, I’ll find another audio of Through the looking Glass. 

These public domain unabridged books may be the way to go for a bit. 

Moving on to next — through the Looking Glass.  I’m glad I own the books as we are directed to look at drawings. Plus, there is creative use of typeset. 

Kurben

Starting a reread of The Voyage of The Dawn Treader by C.S. Lewis. One of the 4, IMO, really really good Narnia books. The other three are good too but dont reach the heights of the top 4. It will be my guilty easter pleasure reading.

GNTLGNT

....I enjoyed the title itself immensely, before I even read the tale...

Kurben

Aint he cute? This little guy lived around 330 millions years ago and is a candidate for the first landliving vertebrate. He was still depondent on water for reproduction, like frogs today, but otherwise landliving. He belongs to a group of amphibians called Temnospondyls and it is probably from that group that the now living amphibians developed like frogs, toads and salamanders and newts. Much later of course. Although the experts are not in concensus on this like they are with mammals and birds and this is the group that gets the most votes. Amphibian evolution is a murky subject because all living amphibians species are highly specialized which makes it difficult to judge which traits developed when.

FlakeNoir

Kurben said:

Aint he cute? This little guy lived around 330 millions years ago and is a candidate for the first landliving vertebrate. He was still depondent on water for reproduction, like frogs today, but otherwise landliving. He belongs to a group of amphibians called Temnospondyls and it is probably from that group that the now living amphibians developed like frogs, toads and salamanders and newts. Much later of course. Although the experts are not in concensus on this like they are with mammals and birds and this is the group that gets the most votes. Amphibian evolution is a murky subject because all living amphibians species are highly specialized which makes it difficult to judge which traits developed when.

He looks a bit like my axolotl. 
(she wouldn't turn around for me)

Kurben

FlakeNoir said:

Kurben said:

Aint he cute? This little guy lived around 330 millions years ago and is a candidate for the first landliving vertebrate. He was still depondent on water for reproduction, like frogs today, but otherwise landliving. He belongs to a group of amphibians called Temnospondyls and it is probably from that group that the now living amphibians developed like frogs, toads and salamanders and newts. Much later of course. Although the experts are not in concensus on this like they are with mammals and birds and this is the group that gets the most votes. Amphibian evolution is a murky subject because all living amphibians species are highly specialized which makes it difficult to judge which traits developed when.

He looks a bit like my axolotl. 
(she wouldn't turn around for me)

Indeed he have a likeness with salamanderlike creatures. His name was Balanerpeton and had a mouth full of sharp teeth and hunted insects primarily. About 50 cm long from head to tail. The first find comes from Scotland. 

FlakeNoir

Kurben said:

FlakeNoir said:

Kurben said:

Aint he cute? This little guy lived around 330 millions years ago and is a candidate for the first landliving vertebrate. He was still depondent on water for reproduction, like frogs today, but otherwise landliving. He belongs to a group of amphibians called Temnospondyls and it is probably from that group that the now living amphibians developed like frogs, toads and salamanders and newts. Much later of course. Although the experts are not in concensus on this like they are with mammals and birds and this is the group that gets the most votes. Amphibian evolution is a murky subject because all living amphibians species are highly specialized which makes it difficult to judge which traits developed when.

He looks a bit like my axolotl. 
(she wouldn't turn around for me)

Indeed he have a likeness with salamanderlike creatures. His name was Balanerpeton and had a mouth full of sharp teeth and hunted insects primarily. About 50 cm long from head to tail. The first find comes from Scotland. 

I'm just glad Consuela doesn't have teeth like Balanerpeton. She's a snappy feeder.
She will be around 30cm fully grown and is very close to that now.

Kurben

Yeah, Consuela looks more peaceful.

GNTLGNT

Hedda Gabler

FlakeNoir said:

Kurben said:

FlakeNoir said:

Kurben said:

Aint he cute? This little guy lived around 330 millions years ago and is a candidate for the first landliving vertebrate. He was still depondent on water for reproduction, like frogs today, but otherwise landliving. He belongs to a group of amphibians called Temnospondyls and it is probably from that group that the now living amphibians developed like frogs, toads and salamanders and newts. Much later of course. Although the experts are not in concensus on this like they are with mammals and birds and this is the group that gets the most votes. Amphibian evolution is a murky subject because all living amphibians species are highly specialized which makes it difficult to judge which traits developed when.

He looks a bit like my axolotl. 
(she wouldn't turn around for me)

Indeed he have a likeness with salamanderlike creatures. His name was Balanerpeton and had a mouth full of sharp teeth and hunted insects primarily. About 50 cm long from head to tail. The first find comes from Scotland. 

I'm just glad Consuela doesn't have teeth like Balanerpeton. She's a snappy feeder.
She will be around 30cm fully grown and is very close to that now.

I forget about her. She is huge!!!

Kurben

Went and did some easter shopping. Happened to wander in to a used bookstore and they had a deal. 10 books for 20 crowns (about 2,5 US dollars). And they had some interesting books there so i went for it. 4 Marjory Allingham (not as good as Christie but still a crime queen worth reading) A book on Churchill during the war years by renowned historian Max Hastings, A Michael Crichton i hadn't read, one of Paton Walsh Lord Peter Books (dont expect much of this because her first was a mess) and one of Sophie Hannahs Poirot books. also two thrillers that are more or less a shot in the dark but even if all are bad (which is unlikely because i expect to keep Allingham and the Churchill book) it will be a good deal! I probably keep crichton too. The rest depends on if they are good or not.

GNTLGNT

Happened to wander in to a used bookstore

Hedda Gabler

@BevVincent. 

Is Picnic in the Graveyard only available as an ebook. I go to their link and don’t see physical book order capabilities ?