Was it Really What She Said

Pauline Kael

Pauline Kael, the greatest movie critic of her generation, was lucky enough to come of age (in her late forties) exactly as “the new Hollywood” of the late sixties was being born. This era of gloriously free and experimental filmmaking is generally considered to have lasted a good 13 years, from the twin release of Arthur Penn’s “Bonnie and Clyde” and Mike Nichols “The Graduate” in 1967, to the twin catastrophes of Michael Cimino’s “Heaven’s Gate” and Francis Ford Coppola’s “One from the Heart” in late1980 and early 1982, respectively. Like the mid 1920s and the formation of the Hollywood studios, the early 1980s also signaled the end of the all-powerful director and the reinstatement of the studio and producer as the power force in Hollywood. Pauline’s career followed a similar arc, although her New Yorker pieces were widely read until she had to retire in 1991 as a result of progressive Parkinson’s disease. For any dedicated movie goer, and certainly any budding film critic who came of age during that period, Pauline’s reviews were essential reading. If you missed even one you felt culturally malnourished. And, like all great film critics, it didn’t really matter whether you agreed with her opinion or not – with me it was always about 50/50 – it was the way she wrote and the points she raised that mattered. If she had a weak point, it was favoritism (someone like Brian De Palma got off way too easy on several occasions) and also the reverse – poor David Lean retired for 14 years after her excoriating, hilarious and, in my opinion, very accurate reviews of “Dr. Zhivago” from 1965 and “Ryan’s Daughter” from 1970.

Recently (2018), director Rob Garver released a documentary titled “What She Said: The Art of Pauline Kael”. The movie is obviously made with love and, at least for this viewer, contains only one major surprise. Of course, we have the usual talking heads saying what we have known about Pauline for decades. However, the appearance of one talking head really got to me. That was director Ridley Scott giving his opinion on Pauline’s review of his classic movie “Blade Runner”. Now, I am a huge “Blade Runner” fan – just the ORIGINAL cut, thank you – and I must have seen it at least five times, when it was released, in the summer of 1982. I also reveled in Pauline’s positive review. It was a gorgeous review, incisive and supremely descriptive – you could almost taste the acid rain falling on a dystopian 2019 Los Angeles. “It has its place in movie history”, she said. The New Yorker’s perfect title for her review was “Baby the Rain Must Fall”. It therefore came as quite a shock to hear that Mr. Scott perceived Pauline’s piece as a negative review that took a David Lean-like toll on his work ethic. Did we read the same piece of movie criticism?

Of all the major critics at the time, Pauline wrote the most incisive and respectful response. Remember, in the summer of 1982, most critics looked on “Blade Runner” with a mixture of condescension and contempt. They were too busy writing encomiums on Spielberg’s now dated “ET”. On Siskel and Ebert, Mr. Roger held the movie in such disdain that he kept referring, on and on, to the replicONS. For any “Blade Runner” fan, it is painful to watch.

Did the filmmakers actually read what Pauline said in this case. The irony obviously speaks for itself. 15 years after she turned the film world and the critical establishment upside down with her review of “Bonnie and Clyde”, in the summer of 1982, she was still way ahead of the Zeitgeist.

BLADE RUNNER 1982 (the version that was released in the summer of 1982 and the only version that I will watch) is available for streaming on Amazon Prime Video while BLADE RUNNER: FINAL CUT (Ridley Scott’s final cut) is available on Amazon Prime and Apple TV.

Share this post

You may also like…

The Treachery of Awards: Kristin, Gillian and René Magritte

The Treachery of Awards: Kristin, Gillian and René Magritte

When a great actor like Stewart or Anderson gives a great performance like Princess Diana or Lilly Bart, and that work is not recognized, or, at least, not recognized to the degree that it should be, there is a cognitive dissonance of the type you get when you gaze at Rene Magritte’s 1929 surrealistic masterpiece “The Treachery of Images “and its three way paradox of image, words and objects.

read more
ALWAYS GOOD FOR A LAUGH, THE SAG AWARDS ARE EXCEPTIONALLY DREADFUL THIS YEAR.

ALWAYS GOOD FOR A LAUGH, THE SAG AWARDS ARE EXCEPTIONALLY DREADFUL THIS YEAR.

Voted on by hundreds of actors, most of whom are too busy waiting tables to see movies at all, and, if they do, their choice is EXTREMELY limited. Limited mainly to Friday night at the Sherman Oaks Galleria. Anything even remotely off the beaten track will not be seen or even heard of. Hence the hideousness of what is listed below. End of discussion. Movies only.

read more
It is Hat-Trick, as “Drive My Car” wins Best Picture from the National Society of Film Critics (NSFC) following its triumphs in  NYFCC and LAFCA.

It is Hat-Trick, as “Drive My Car” wins Best Picture from the National Society of Film Critics (NSFC) following its triumphs in NYFCC and LAFCA.

With the announcement of the National Society of Film Critics (NSFC) choices, ‘Drive My Car” has now won the Best Picture award from all three major critic groups. This is quite an achievement and with its additional awards for Best Director, .Best Screenplay and Best Actor, it now stands an excellent chance of being Oscar nominated for Best International Film, Best Director and Best Adapted Screenplay and to become the 11th Foreign Language Film to be nominated in the Best Film category following in the footsteps of…..

read more

Subscribe for the latest reviews right in your inbox!

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *