Ebert, Corliss, Sarris, Truffaut, Schrader and Turan.
I happen to agree with many of the critics Aram mentioned, though I would include such critics as Jeffrey Welles, Anne Thompson, A.O, Scott, and Moriarty (aicn.com). I imagine there might be some arguments in regards to their value as critics. I would argue that they a strong voice in film criticism when it comes to the blogisphere. Especially, since many of the critics are running to the web to post their criticisms.
I don’t always agree with these critics. I read them for their varying views. My favorite critic is probably Roger Ebert. Simply because within his criticisms is a passionate filmlover of the highest regard. Someone who marvels at everything a movie has to offer. I would probably place Bordwell as second. More theorist than critic, his views help to guide me in how I see films.
Rosenbaum is good. Kermode is entertaining.
I stick with Peter Travers (from Rolling Stone) for the most part. We agree about 85% of the time, so his reviews come in handy.
David Denby has been head and shoulders above most of the critics for some time now. What happened to the heyday of film criticism?
It would be nice to see a variety of critics, other than those of the Nick James (Editor of Sight and Sound) glee club. It’s the same names, over and over again. And, no, they’re not the best critics the UK has to offer. Far too much media whoring with these guys, riding the journalistic gravy train.
I can’t believe that no one has mentioned Pauline Kael. I also enjoy reading Libby Gelman-Waxner and Stanley Kaufmann.
Also, Philip Lopate’s book Totally Tenderly Tragically is probably one of my favorite books about someone’s film experiences – I would highly recommend it to anyone.
Like most people in here, I also read Ebert.
David Denby; Anthony Lane; A.O. Scott
i like jean-luc godard’s criticism. for contemporary, mainstream press critics, i like ebert, even though a lot of his reviews are starting to sound like the work of a cranky old man who’s seen it all and has to mention that fact a lot.
Rosenbaum, Jonathon Romney, Graham Fuller. I usually agree with Geoff Andrew taste-wise, so I go to him for a consumer-perspective if not for deep analysis. Most of all, I enjoy commentary from filmmakers on other filmmakers – Olivier Assayas springs to mind.
I love the good folks over at The Onion’s A.V. Club. I’ve also been a mark for Pauline Kael’s work since I was in high school.
personally, and this is sort of anti-climatic of the subject but…i try not to listen or read any of the critics.
Ebert’s okay but, for the most part, film critics will hoot and holler about what they consider the “best” and that you should check them out. but, when you do, you sort of find yourself wondering: what was that critic “smoking”.
for example, a lot of critics praised Wong Kar-Wai’s “In the Mood for Love”. but, seriously, for a film that’s about 90 minutes long, it feels like an eternity to me and was the film that made me finally decide that maybe i shouldn’t really pay critics that much attention or allow them to have any influence on what i want to see.
I recently discovered Jonathan Romney and highly recommend him. He does more than just evaluate.
Farber and Agee will always be the king
I follow Rosenbaum, J. Hoberman and Armond White. Ed Gonzales at Slant magazine is quite good too but not as well known. I think everyone in Film Comment is pretty good too, even if I don’t agree with them all of the time. Dave Kehr has a great blog as well.
mark kermode is my favourite to listen to, hes so passionate and his rants are amazing. check out his podcast from bbc 5live, its on itunes (just search for kermode). in print i read the guardian, so phillip french and peter bradshaw are my writers of choice.
I’ve read Andre Bazin’s book on Renoir and articles by Jean-Luc Godard. I have much enjoyment ahead of me!
I’ve read Andre Bazin’s book on Renoir and articles by Jean-Luc Godard. I have much enjoyment ahead of me!
andre bazin’s mini documentary on john cassavetes is outstanding.
edit- it wasnt bazin, i was abbas kiarostami. and was produced by janine BAZIN and ANDRE labarthe, hence the confusion! cheers to rodney for clearing that up
Sure about that, Adam? Bazin died in 1958.
I follow Ebert and occasionally The New Yorker film reviews. That said I normally goto Rotten Tomatoes and check out the bad reviews first to see what people didn’t like and then the positive and I make an informed review.
There will never be another Pauline Kael, more’s the pity. I hope she’s eating popcorn in some cinema in the sky. Anthony Lane, who replaced her at The New Yorker is very good, (I still remember his review of Speed – Superb!). Michael Sragow of The San Francisco Examiner (and a pupil of Kael’s), wrote for The New Yorker for a while following Kael’s illness and now can be found at The Baltimore Sun. He is very good.
Only Ebert.
Hopefully he’s able to stay with us and win his battles, but i’ve always had mad respect for Roger Eberts reviews. He is always spot on and i do miss his original partner Gene Siskel. They were the first critics i ever read and they always gave an honest and concise opinion. Plus since i was a teen Rene Rodriguez has been the Miami Herald’s main film critic. I’ve found him to be very unbiased and tackles his films very technically aware of many elements a good film requires, a fine film critic!
In no particular order (although the internet is my main source besides Word of Mouth)
Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun-Times) If you are down with Hoop Dreams; you are down with me!
Moriarty (aicn.com) The whole site is full of sellouts and attention whores but Scott Swan does a good job
Devin (chud.com) Devin Farci is loud, rude, and generally the “Angry Sportscaster” on internet movie reviewers, proudly wearing his hate on his sleeve so you know what his bias might be.
Anthony Lane is the reason why I pick up the New Yorker each week.
Nada. Film critics are pretentious snobs most of the time.
In 2008 it’s Johnathan Rosenbaum
I don’t specifically follow any of them. If I am looking for info on a certain film I will search for and read whatever and whoever comes up…well, not everyone that comes up, but you get the idea.
Although The Stranger is a pretty satyrical newsmag, I have found their reviews to be pretty good usually.
A.O. Scott, Manohla Dargis, Stephen Holden, Anthony Lane, David Denby, and Film Comment writers are the ones I read currently.
Andrew Sarris, Pauline Kael, Truffaut, Andre Bazin and James Agee are the older generation ones who I read.
TimothyJSharp
For me, it’s Andrew O’Hehir, Roger Ebert, David Stratton, Jonathon Rosenbaum, Andrew Sarris, David Bordwell (though he’s more of a theorist), Stephanie Zacharek and Vern.
I rarely agree with all of them all the time, (particularly Zacharek), but they make for stimulating reading.
You can include dead/retired ones as well. (I always thought that Dario Argento was a TERRIBLE critic.)