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?)