Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!sri-unix!Alazar.ES@XEROX.ARPA From: Alazar.ES@XEROX.ARPA Newsgroups: net.movies Subject: Re: Critics Message-ID: <12691@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date: Tue, 21-Aug-84 22:04:15 EDT Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.12691 Posted: Tue Aug 21 22:04:15 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 23-Aug-84 02:07:56 EDT Lines: 27 Lyons' partner is named Neil Gabler; both of them are callow and shallow. Siskel is subject to cardiohemorrhage, but at least is articulate. Notwithstanding your comment that he gives "gut reactions, not analyses," I like Roger Ebert because of his analyses. And besides, he has (really!) a screen credit for writing one of the Valley of the Dolls epics--Beyond t.V.o.t.D., I think. But these are just reviewers. You want to talk critic, that's something else. You could safely start with Crist. Judith, that is. Inventor, practically, of the aesthetic du junk. Richard Grennier is better still: sprightly but serious, always interesting, and comes from a refreshingly different slant. But the champion is easily John Simon. No pushover. Eternal standards for our time. A word-craftsman in Diogenes-like search of tri-acetate craftsmanship. (Grennier makes the point, by the way, that many of us are given to the cliche "celluloid" for movies, when they have been on tri-acetate for decades.) (It is no reflection on Simon that Diogenes, out searching for an honest man all those years, was wanted back in Athens for counterfeiting. Maybe he was looking for someone to cheat?)