Circles and Squares

Kael, Pauline

doi:10.1525/fq.1963.16.3.04a00040

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Auteur theory, popular and controversial in the 60 s and 70 s (Kael, 1963; Sarris, 1974) and still relevant (Jones, 2014), asserts that a film reflects the director’s personal creative vision, as if she or he were the primary auteur . In spite of—and sometimes even because of—a film’s production, the voice of the director qua auteur is distinct enough to shine through studio interferences as well as the collaborative process.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Film Award Choices

Wanderer

2015

Empirical Studies of the Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three sources—domain experts, consumers, and professional film critics—engage in the recognition and validation of cinematic excellence. Each signals its approbation with awards, ratings, reviews, and lists of the best. Notwithstanding a generous body of research, congruence among these sources remains unclear. For example, research findings show the influence of critics’ reviews on box office receipts—consumers—vary from strong to nil. Some studies report similarities in critics’ and consumers’ cinematic taste; others report differences. This article seeks a clarification of one facet of the role of critics in the recognition of cinematic excellence by comparing critics’ film award choices—not their ratings—with Oscar awards, in four categories: best actor, actress, director, and film. For each pair of award categories, chi-squares were performed on cross-classifications of the frequency of critics’ choices matching Oscar’s. Cramer’s V sheds light on auteur theory, actress–actor differences, and coat-tail effects of best film awards.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Film Award Choices

Wanderer

2015

Empirical Studies of the Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a 1963 article originally published in Film Quarterly (reprinted in her collection I Lost It at the Movies), "Circles and Squares: Sarris and Joy," she addressed each of the three premises of the auteur theory expounded by Sarris in his original article. 7 She argued that expression and style are more important than technical competence, that the fact that a viewer can distinguish the personality of the director is secondary to the value of an individual film, and that cinema is not at all about interior meaning and the tension between the director's personality and material. As a result of these premises, Kael maintained that auteur critics often glorified trash.…”

Section: F Ifty Years Ago Andrew Sarris Publishedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8 Disparaging of formulaic critics who applied a single approach such as auteur theory, she considered herself a "pluralist" drawing eclectically and judiciously from "the best standards and principles from various systems of ideas." 9 In contrast to Sarris, Kael wanted critics to judge the individual movie rather than consider the director's entire corpus. Her riposte was the beginning of a series of ongoing debates in print and in person that attracted followers who identified as Paulettes or Sarristes.…”

Section: F Ifty Years Ago Andrew Sarris Publishedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collecting to the Core — The American Cinema: Directors and Directions, 1929-1968

Emmons¹,

Doherty²

2021

Against the Grain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The career of Pauline Kael touched upon almost all of the individual instances of crisis broached in this book. It stretched from the earliest permutations of crisis -regarding the respectability of the medium and the status and role of the critic -through the defining stances towards French film culture (of which Kael herself famously took part via her polemics against Andrew Sarris); 160 negotiating a cosy, yet authoritative relationship to readers and a close, influential, but sometimes antagonistic one with the industry; to the challenge presented by broadcast media. In addition to existing on the threshold of historical periods, Kael also had a role in the fragmentation of film criticism between academic film studies and journalistic reviewing.…”

Section: From Sarris To Siskel Television To Twittermentioning

confidence: 99%

The permanent crisis of film criticism: the anxiety of authority

2016

Choice Reviews Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Film Theory in Media History explores the epistemological and theoretical foundations of the study of film through texts by classical authors as well as anthologies and monographs on key issues and developments in film theory. Adopting a historical perspective, but with a firm eye to the further development of the field, the series provides a platform for ground-breaking new research into film theory and media history and features high-profile editorial projects that offer resources for teaching and scholarship. Combining the book form with open access online publishing the series reaches the broadest possible audience of scholars, students, and other readers with a passion for film and theory.Series editors: Prof. dr. Vinzenz Hediger (Goethe Universität, Frankfurt am Main), dr. Trond Lundemo (Stockholm University), and prof. dr. Weihong Bao (Berkeley, University of California)Advisory board: Prof. dr. Dudley Andrew (Yale University), prof. dr. Ray Raymond (CNRS Paris), prof. dr. Chris Berry (Goldsmiths, University of London), prof. dr. Francesco Casetti (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milano, Yale University), prof. dr. Thomas Elsaesser (Universiteit van Amsterdam), prof. dr. Jane Gaines (Columbia University and Duke University), prof. dr. André Gaudreault (University of Montréal), prof. dr. Gertrud Koch (Free University of Berlin), prof. dr. John Mac (Yale University), prof. dr. Markus Nornes (University of Michigan), prof. dr. Patricia Pisters (Universiteit van Amsterdam), prof. dr. Leonardo Quaresima (University of Udine), prof. dr. David Rodowick (Harvard University), prof. dr. Philip Rosen (Brown University), prof. dr. Petr Szczepanik (Masaryk University, Brno), prof. dr. Brian Winston (Lincoln University)Film Theory in Media History is published in cooperation with the Permanent Seminar for the History of Film Theories. The Permanent Crisis of Film CriticismThe Anxiety of Authority Mattias Frey Amsterdam University PressThis book is published in print and online through the online OAPEN library (www. oapen.org).OAPEN (Open Access Publishing in European Networks) is a collaborative initiative to develop and implement a sustainable Open Access publication model for academic books in the Humanities and Social Sciences. The OAPEN Library aims to improve the visibility and usability of high quality academic research by aggregating peer reviewed Open Access publications from across Europe. Some rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, any part of this book may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise).To the permanent memory of my father Although criticism has from time to time "enjoyed its teeth-baring and wound-licking moments of 'crisis,'" editor-in-chief Nick James writes, "this time there is real pain." 8 Among the many, perhaps insurmountable and irreversible challenges James lists include the free access to reviews from established sou...

show abstract

Circles and Squares

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Film Award Choices

Film Award Choices

Collecting to the Core — The American Cinema: Directors and Directions, 1929-1968

The permanent crisis of film criticism: the anxiety of authority

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About