Re: ‘King Arthur’ Movie Falls on Its Sword in Opening Weekend - WSJ

[jesse gooch]

Sounds about right. You might’ve read this one already, but I always like hearing Adler bash Kael.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1980/08/14/the-perils-of-pauline/ <http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1980/08/14/the-perils-of-pauline/>


> On May 16, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Is it sad or just trivially fascinating in my "private mythology"---oxymoron intended; book allusion---that some Plist posts,
> esp one not about Pynchon but the movies and critical judgmental cowardice brought this story back to me. Half-forgotten because it is like mental wallpaper I never take note of anymore:
> 
> A median kind of Movie Industry guy one told this story: He was at an advance screening of some movie, I probably falsely remember that it was a new movie by Lawrence Kasdan, which was "different' from his last success--a critical and box office success, I think--and he saw Pauline Kael already seated. Not too close but certainly closer than halfway to the screen and just
> a seat or three off dead center---someone had decided publicly this was the best place to sit (but that may be another story I heard and NOT part of this one but take it or leave it). The 'different' movie ended. Some stood, no one said anything....Pauline kept sitting....until she said, "Well, overall I liked it".....and suddenly many borrowing minds--mimic persons-- decided to like it too now that it had been anointed...
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com <mailto:mark.kohut at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Cowardice and borrowing other's opinions gets my vote. I saw it in publishing and book reviewing all the time; was not without sin myself; pretty surely think I saw it in movie reviewing just about always but now more than ever. ( but that's a shakey judgment since I don't follow as I once did. )
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On May 14, 2017, at 9:34 PM, Robert Mahnke <rpmahnke at gmail.com <mailto:rpmahnke at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>> Easier to borrow someone else's opinions than to think for oneself?
>> 
>> It wasn't a great movie but I kinda liked it, and wouldn't have gone but for this thread. Maybe I don't get out enough. 
>> 
>> Sent from an iPhone; pls xcse typos. 
>> 
>> On May 14, 2017, at 16:55, Laura <laurakelber at gmail.com <mailto:laurakelber at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Just saw King Arthur today, and while I liked the London gangster elements Ritchie imported from his other movies, they weren't enough to prevent this from being a standard-issue crappy action flick with obvious plot points, ludicrous characters and boring CGI.
>>> 
>>> That being said, I don't see any particular reason why the critics should pile on this one and rave about similarly-schlocky action pix du jour. It sure seems like they're getting paid to rave, at times. Is there some secretive Scarsdale Vibe pulling the strings? Or just collective cowardice?
>>> 
>>> Laura
>>> 
>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Allan Balliett <allan.balliett at gmail.com <mailto:allan.balliett at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I saw a similar story on Friday, which caused me to believe the Hollywood system wants to kill it
>>> 
>>> Think of Costner's Water World
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 4:11 PM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com <mailto:mark.kohut at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> Hurry, it's bleeding to death.
>>> 
>>> https://www.wsj.com/articles/king-arthur-movie-falls-on-its-sword-in-opening-weekend-1494786805?mod=e2tw <https://www.wsj.com/articles/king-arthur-movie-falls-on-its-sword-in-opening-weekend-1494786805?mod=e2tw>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPad
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20170516/cfce5ffa/attachment.html>