What do you think?
Rate this book
American Movie Critics: An Anthology From the Silents Until Now
A dual history of American movies and movie reviews evaluates how the nation's films have both fostered new ways of seeing the world and spawned an extraordinary body of critical writing, in a collection of essays that includes contributions by such figures as James Agee, Ralph Ellison, and Roger Ebert.
825 pages, Hardcover
First published March 2, 2006
13 people are currently reading
501 people want to read
About the author
Phillip Lopate
105 books104 followersPhillip Lopate is the author of three personal essay collections, two novels, two poetry collections, a memoir of his teaching experiences, and a collection of his movie criticism. He has edited the following anthologies, and his essays, fiction, poetry, film and architectural criticism have appeared in The Best American Short Stories, The Best American Essays, The Paris Review, Harper's, Vogue, Esquire, New York Times, Harvard Educational Review, Conde Nast Traveler, and many other periodicals and anthologies. He has been awarded a John Simon Guggenheim Fellowship, a New York Public Library Center for Scholars and Writers Fellowship, two National Endowment for the Arts grants, and two New York Foundation for the Arts grants. After working with children for twelve years as a writer in the schools, he taught creative writing and literature at Fordham, Cooper Union, University of Houston, and New York University. He currently holds the John Cranford Adams Chair at Hofstra University, and also teaches in the MFA graduate programs at Columbia, the New School and Bennington.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
March 2, 2016
For anyone interested, I've been discussing this book chapter-by-chapter with fellow film lover Jandy Hardesty, and our discussions can be
read here
.
April 25, 2008
I haven't read all of them, of course, but I love film writing. All of them seem very passionate about their craft, and what comes of that is some of the most "alive" writing out there.
November 16, 2020
Mom didn't go to the movies often, but she'd read Roger Ebert's film reviews in the Chicago Sun-Times just for the pleasure of Ebert's brilliant, witty prose.
You can enjoy a similar pleasure with this jam-packed anthology of reviews and other pieces on the movies by some of the best reviewers since the beginning of the film-making arts.
Only a few of the names of these writers were familiar to me, but it was so interesting to journey back in time to learn what the critics said when "The Ten Commandments" came out, or "King Kong," or "The Misfits."
The first daily movie review in The New York Times, Andre Sennwald, called "Becky Sharp" a bad picture, but the fact that it was produced in color — Technicolor to be exact — was "another momentous advance" in the cinematic art form.
There is a contemporary feel about going back to read a lengthy analysis of "Gone With the Wind," and that's because the review by Melvin B. Tolson appeared in the Washington Tribune, the weekly African-American newspaper. He blasts it for its caricature of plantation life and happy Blacks who just happened to be slaves.
If you recall being treated to a Friday afternoon movie at your Catholic school in the 1950-60s it might have been "The Song of Bernadette" you watched. It was interesting to read the review by a reviewer who didn't want to like the film but admitted he was moved by parts of it.
Along with reviews of popular films like "Casablanca," "Patton," "The Birds," "8 1/2," "In Cold Blood," critics often offered interesting analyses of trends in the movies, such as Barbara Deming's take on "The Reluctant War Hero," Robert Warshow's view of "The Gangster as Tragic Hero." Andrew Sarris went on at length about director Billy Wilder and the legacy of actor John Wayne.
The New Yorker's star reviewer Pauline Kael went in-depth on Barbra Streisand and "Funny Girl."
A brief biographical sketch introduces each of the critics' work, often offering insight into the the times in which they wrote and the gifts they brought to the profession.
Since the scope of the anthology covers the silent era to the 21st century and goes for 700+ pages, many of the films reviewed may have been ones you've watched on television or tape. What's the most fun is reading the reviews of those you went to the theater to see. I happened to agree with what The New York Times' Vincent Canby called "lower case cinema" in his review of "Easy Rider," but found Time magazine's Richard Corliss more than a little off-base with his denunciation of the movie version of "M*A*S*H."
But then, that's why we read the movie critics.
You can enjoy a similar pleasure with this jam-packed anthology of reviews and other pieces on the movies by some of the best reviewers since the beginning of the film-making arts.
Only a few of the names of these writers were familiar to me, but it was so interesting to journey back in time to learn what the critics said when "The Ten Commandments" came out, or "King Kong," or "The Misfits."
The first daily movie review in The New York Times, Andre Sennwald, called "Becky Sharp" a bad picture, but the fact that it was produced in color — Technicolor to be exact — was "another momentous advance" in the cinematic art form.
There is a contemporary feel about going back to read a lengthy analysis of "Gone With the Wind," and that's because the review by Melvin B. Tolson appeared in the Washington Tribune, the weekly African-American newspaper. He blasts it for its caricature of plantation life and happy Blacks who just happened to be slaves.
If you recall being treated to a Friday afternoon movie at your Catholic school in the 1950-60s it might have been "The Song of Bernadette" you watched. It was interesting to read the review by a reviewer who didn't want to like the film but admitted he was moved by parts of it.
Along with reviews of popular films like "Casablanca," "Patton," "The Birds," "8 1/2," "In Cold Blood," critics often offered interesting analyses of trends in the movies, such as Barbara Deming's take on "The Reluctant War Hero," Robert Warshow's view of "The Gangster as Tragic Hero." Andrew Sarris went on at length about director Billy Wilder and the legacy of actor John Wayne.
The New Yorker's star reviewer Pauline Kael went in-depth on Barbra Streisand and "Funny Girl."
A brief biographical sketch introduces each of the critics' work, often offering insight into the the times in which they wrote and the gifts they brought to the profession.
Since the scope of the anthology covers the silent era to the 21st century and goes for 700+ pages, many of the films reviewed may have been ones you've watched on television or tape. What's the most fun is reading the reviews of those you went to the theater to see. I happened to agree with what The New York Times' Vincent Canby called "lower case cinema" in his review of "Easy Rider," but found Time magazine's Richard Corliss more than a little off-base with his denunciation of the movie version of "M*A*S*H."
But then, that's why we read the movie critics.
June 25, 2017
The Library of America’s mission is “to preserve America’s literary heritage by publishing and keeping permanently in print authoritative editions of America’s best and most significant writing.” This comprehensive anthology of essays on movies is in keeping with that mission. The emphasis is not so much on film, but on quality writing about film. Appreciators of cinema, criticism, and literature will all enjoy this book.
May 23, 2017
Actually, three and a half stars...
Lots of insightful reviews, but in a book this size there are some long-winded dissections and individuals styles that made me give up and bump to the next.
Plenty of recommendations to fill my upcoming movie nights!
September 6, 2018
Masterfully assembled anthology of the best of movie reviews, actor/director studies, and commentary. Film criticism became a literary genre all its own. One can jump around to favorite subjects and put together a list of must-sees.
April 26, 2019
A massive anthology of American writing on film that spans from the 1920's to the 21st century. There are a few contributors that I found to be of little interest, but anybody with a real interest in film will find a lot of interest. Some of the articles were simply astonishingly good.
November 13, 2020
Indispensible. A TREASURE.
February 18, 2021
Liked some of the essays, didn't care for others, but did find a number of movies I have added to my `to watch' list. A long book that I read in fits & starts, overall I enjoyed it
April 23, 2023
Robust sample of movie writing, an invaluable collection of criticism from a great span of time and films.
November 6, 2024
Extraordinary Manny Farber and Pauline Kael selection.
(Although including just one Sontag essay is criminal)
(Although including just one Sontag essay is criminal)
February 26, 2018
This book serves as an essential phoropter that cycles through a multiplicity of varying lenses to look at a wide cross-sections of films, sometimes cross-examining the same films to give a perspective on critical shifts and sometimes even doubling back to cross-examine criticism which has appeared in the same anthology, in the delightfully self-absorbed tendency common to film criticism. The carefully selected parts of the whole sum to a serious engagement with a form still thought to be more unworthy than almost any other of such engagement, but far from being a stilted academic exercise, this book will leave anyone who loves film and criticism loving both even more than when they came in.
The first section of the book, comprised of just over the first hundred pages, is markedly weaker than the rest of the compilation in retrospect, but rather than an error of curation, this comparable weakness is mostly the evidence of the lack of foundational critical precedents to those pieces. The form builds on and improves itself from then on, becoming more polished, as good writing not just layered onto the film medium but expressly molded to it in a now-established grammar and idiom. It's fascinating to see how so many of the familiar tensions and dichotomies that still preoccupy film critics today (depiction vs. endorsement, and relatedly, observation vs. complicity; artistic impulses vs. commercial ones; form vs. content; intent vs. interpretation) arose in various guises from almost the very beginning of the time period reflected here, with familiar germs of arguments rhyming with those of future ones, just as the films being contemplated rhyme with their future ancestors. (There are some even more specific surprises, such as that two pet theories of Francois Truffaut's as a Cahiers du cinema critic in the fifties, namely la politique des Auteurs and the impossibility of making an anti-war film, are significantly foreshadowed by the work of American critics preceding his critical career by thirty or so years.) Familiar too is the push and pull reflected in the writing between inflating their own craft of film criticism and that of the broader filmic medium that they're covering, and such amusing asides as the sneering dismissal of Bosley Crowther even by his contemporaries.
The structure of the text, with critical selections often looking backward from the period in which they were written, means that the films discussed most commonly do skew somewhat toward the first half of the century; while I wouldn't trade the opportunity to see the classics revisited, I wouldn't have minded additional texts being added to the last two sections to counteract this imbalance somewhat. For the most part, though, there's little fault to be found with the curation; the critics represented within are necessarily dictated to some degree by the obvious prominence of certain names within the canon, but Lopate did an admirable job of not including their most famous work, preferring to include deeper cuts at most opportunities. There are only three essays contained here that are so notable as to have ascended out of the niche of film criticism and attained general awareness (Schrader's "Notes on Film Noir," Kael's "Trash, Art, and the Movies," and Farber's "White Elephant Art vs. Termite Art"), and their absence would have been virtually unimaginable; all but Schrader were also represented additionally by other work (and the absence of further work of his was the only real regret I had about specific choices of inclusion/exclusion).
The only real significant knock on this book is the apparently somewhat slipshod editorial job of the copy, which resulted in the overlooking of a not-insignifcant number of instances of uncorrected spelling or inappropriate usages; such mistakes aren't prevalent enough to detract from the enjoyment or value, but they do suggest a lack of care that is a bit disappointing, as if the work within was perversely deemed strong enough on its own to not necessarily merit the fullest of attention in its preparation and packaging.
The first section of the book, comprised of just over the first hundred pages, is markedly weaker than the rest of the compilation in retrospect, but rather than an error of curation, this comparable weakness is mostly the evidence of the lack of foundational critical precedents to those pieces. The form builds on and improves itself from then on, becoming more polished, as good writing not just layered onto the film medium but expressly molded to it in a now-established grammar and idiom. It's fascinating to see how so many of the familiar tensions and dichotomies that still preoccupy film critics today (depiction vs. endorsement, and relatedly, observation vs. complicity; artistic impulses vs. commercial ones; form vs. content; intent vs. interpretation) arose in various guises from almost the very beginning of the time period reflected here, with familiar germs of arguments rhyming with those of future ones, just as the films being contemplated rhyme with their future ancestors. (There are some even more specific surprises, such as that two pet theories of Francois Truffaut's as a Cahiers du cinema critic in the fifties, namely la politique des Auteurs and the impossibility of making an anti-war film, are significantly foreshadowed by the work of American critics preceding his critical career by thirty or so years.) Familiar too is the push and pull reflected in the writing between inflating their own craft of film criticism and that of the broader filmic medium that they're covering, and such amusing asides as the sneering dismissal of Bosley Crowther even by his contemporaries.
The structure of the text, with critical selections often looking backward from the period in which they were written, means that the films discussed most commonly do skew somewhat toward the first half of the century; while I wouldn't trade the opportunity to see the classics revisited, I wouldn't have minded additional texts being added to the last two sections to counteract this imbalance somewhat. For the most part, though, there's little fault to be found with the curation; the critics represented within are necessarily dictated to some degree by the obvious prominence of certain names within the canon, but Lopate did an admirable job of not including their most famous work, preferring to include deeper cuts at most opportunities. There are only three essays contained here that are so notable as to have ascended out of the niche of film criticism and attained general awareness (Schrader's "Notes on Film Noir," Kael's "Trash, Art, and the Movies," and Farber's "White Elephant Art vs. Termite Art"), and their absence would have been virtually unimaginable; all but Schrader were also represented additionally by other work (and the absence of further work of his was the only real regret I had about specific choices of inclusion/exclusion).
The only real significant knock on this book is the apparently somewhat slipshod editorial job of the copy, which resulted in the overlooking of a not-insignifcant number of instances of uncorrected spelling or inappropriate usages; such mistakes aren't prevalent enough to detract from the enjoyment or value, but they do suggest a lack of care that is a bit disappointing, as if the work within was perversely deemed strong enough on its own to not necessarily merit the fullest of attention in its preparation and packaging.
May 28, 2011
Editor Lopate has really done a fantastic job of collecting critical American writings on film, including some very early and obscure pieces of interest to those curious about the history of film reception and the film industry. What he could have included more of were representatives of daily reviews from the decades of work covered in this volume (there are several such reviews, but they tend to disappear once the chronology of the book reaches the 1970s; thus there are no essays discussing the work of important directors such as Scorsese, Woody Allen, Coppola, et al.). Some of my favorite pieces: Siegfried Kracauer's work on film psychology (I've always like Kracauer's work), the two consecutive essays reviewing Spike Lee's _Do the Right Thing_ (laudatory) and _Malcolm X_ (scathing), and the review of the latest _Cat in the Hat_ film done in verse. A quite impressive job of editing a massive amount of material.
August 2, 2010
A very diverse, mostly chronologically-ordered sampling of American film criticism, this collection is inspiring and informative even when the critic whose approach and style you're being introduced to can only serve as a negative example (from my POV, this means John Simon and Vincent Canby). As much as I enjoyed being introduced to Manny Farber, Parker Tyler, William S. Pechter James Harvey--and revisiting J. Hoberman, Sigfried Kracauer, and Molly Haskell--the unexpected revelation here is the older pieces from now virtually unknown writers, which demonstrate both the power of the initial impact of cinema and its early innovations, as well as the demand of the medium for rapidly increasing critical sophistication in the face of its accelerated development.
January 29, 2013
Includes tiny amount of interesting early movie criticism; remainder is rehash of oft-reprinted/quoted essay-length paeons to Citizen Kane, Keaton, and the sex movies of Andy Warhol. This tome is not worth the effort of carrying it home.
Read
August 19, 2013A great book by Phillip Lopate. You can get an overall view of FILM criticism history and critics in U.S.A. The critics who shaped the knowledge and understanding of cultivated moviegoers. I have translated it all, still looking for a publisher!
February 8, 2012
an ongoing project...
July 28, 2008
Great collection of reviews and writings on film from the cinema's inception or rather, consideration as a serious art form, to the present day.
September 4, 2008
Good jump off point for learning about movie reviews, not purely academic hoo ha.
January 4, 2017
"This is an excellent survey. It makes me want to read many of these critics in far greater depth."
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews