Vulgar auteurism: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m A li'l clean-up |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Vulgar auteurism''' is a term used to describe an ongoing movement<ref name=foundas>{{cite web|last=Foundas|first=Scott|title='Pompeii' doesn't suck: Paul W.S. Anderson and Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://variety.com/2014/film/news/why-pompeii-doesnt-blow-1201120363/|publisher=''Variety''}}</ref><ref name=fsr>{{cite web|last=Palmer|first=Landon|title=What the Insular Debate About "Vulgar Auteurism" Says About Contemporary Movie Criticism and Cinephilia|url=http://filmschoolrejects.com/features/vulgar-auteurism-contemporary-movie-criticism.php|publisher=''Film School Rejects''}}</ref><ref name=labuza>{{cite web|last=Labuza|first=Peter|title=Expressive Esoterica in the 21st Century—Or: What Is Vulgar Auteurism?|url=http://www.labuzamovies.com/2013/06/expressive-esoterica-in-21st-centuryor.html|publisher=LabuzaMovies.com}}</ref> in [[film criticism]] associated with championing or reappraising filmmakers, mostly working in the [[Action film|action genre]], whose work has been overlooked or maligned by the critical mainstream.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=brody>{{cite web|last=Brody|first=Richard|title=A Few Thoughts on Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/movies/2013/06/vulgar-auteurism-history-of-new-wave-cinema.html|publisher=''The New Yorker''}}</ref> Initially associated with the [[social network]] and [[streaming media|streaming]] service [[Mubi (website)|Mubi]]<ref name=labuza /> and its online film magazine, ''Notebook'',<ref name=labuza /> vulgar auteurism became a controversial<ref name=fsr /><ref name=singer>{{cite web|last=Singer|first=Matt|title=Some Refined Discussion About Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://blogs.indiewire.com/criticwire/from-the-wire-more-on-vulgar-auteurism|publisher=Indiewire}}</ref> topic in the [[cinephilia|cinephile]] community following the publication of an article in the ''[[Village Voice]]'' in 2013.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=fsr /><ref name=brody /> |
'''Vulgar auteurism''' is a term used to describe an ongoing movement<ref name=foundas>{{cite web|last=Foundas|first=Scott|title='Pompeii' doesn't suck: Paul W.S. Anderson and Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://variety.com/2014/film/news/why-pompeii-doesnt-blow-1201120363/|publisher=''Variety''}}</ref><ref name=fsr>{{cite web|last=Palmer|first=Landon|title=What the Insular Debate About "Vulgar Auteurism" Says About Contemporary Movie Criticism and Cinephilia|url=http://filmschoolrejects.com/features/vulgar-auteurism-contemporary-movie-criticism.php|publisher=''Film School Rejects''}}</ref><ref name=labuza>{{cite web|last=Labuza|first=Peter|title=Expressive Esoterica in the 21st Century—Or: What Is Vulgar Auteurism?|url=http://www.labuzamovies.com/2013/06/expressive-esoterica-in-21st-centuryor.html|publisher=LabuzaMovies.com}}</ref> in [[film criticism]] associated with championing or reappraising filmmakers, mostly working in the [[Action film|action genre]], whose work has been overlooked or maligned by the critical mainstream.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=brody>{{cite web|last=Brody|first=Richard|title=A Few Thoughts on Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/movies/2013/06/vulgar-auteurism-history-of-new-wave-cinema.html|publisher=''The New Yorker''}}</ref> Initially associated with the [[social network]] and [[streaming media|streaming]] service [[Mubi (website)|Mubi]]<ref name=labuza /> and its online film magazine, ''Notebook'',<ref name=labuza /> vulgar auteurism became a controversial<ref name=fsr /><ref name=singer>{{cite web|last=Singer|first=Matt|title=Some Refined Discussion About Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://blogs.indiewire.com/criticwire/from-the-wire-more-on-vulgar-auteurism|publisher=Indiewire}}</ref> topic in the [[cinephilia|cinephile]] community following the publication of an article in the ''[[Village Voice]]'' in 2013.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=fsr /><ref name=brody /> It has been described as "a critical movement committed to assessing the 'unserious' artistry of popcorn cinema with absolute seriousness."<ref name=patches>{{cite web|last=Patches|first=Matt|title=The Other Paul Anderson: The Psychotic Action Vision of ‘Pompeii’ Director Paul W.S. Anderson|url=http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/the-other-paul-anderson-the-psychotic-action-vision-of-pompeii-director-paul-w-s-anderson/|publisher=Grantland}}</ref> |
||
Directors whose work is commonly associated with vulgar auteurism include [[Paul W.S. Anderson]]<ref name=foundas /> <ref name=fsr />, [[Tony Scott]]<ref name=labuza />, [[John Hyams]]<ref name=brody />, [[Isaac Florentine]]<ref name=labuza />, [[Neveldine & Taylor]]<ref name=fsr /><ref name=singer />, [[Nimrod Antal]]<ref name=singer />, [[Michael Bay]], [[Jon M. Chu]]<ref name=brody />, [[Russell Mulcahy]]<ref name=shambu>{{cite web|last=Shambu|first=Girish|title=Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://girishshambu.blogspot.com/2013/06/vulgar-auteurism.html|publisher=Girish Shambu}}</ref>, and [[Justin Lin]]<ref name=fsr />, as well as more critically respected figures like [[Michael Mann]]<ref name=shambu />, [[John McTiernan]]<ref name=labuza /><ref name=burnett>{{cite web|last=Burnett|first=Colin|title=“Vulgar Auteurism:” Out with the New, In with the Old|url=http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2013/06/11/vulgar-auteurism-out-with-the-new-in-with-the-old/|publisher=''Antenna''}}</ref> , [[Walter Hill]]<ref name=singer />, [[John Carpenter]]<ref name=labuza />, [[Kathryn Bigelow]]<ref name=labuza />, and [[Abel Ferrara]].<ref name=shambu /> |
Directors whose work is commonly associated with vulgar auteurism include [[Paul W.S. Anderson]]<ref name=foundas /> <ref name=fsr /><ref name=patches /><ref name=mueller>{{cite web|last=Mueller|first=Matt|title='Pompeii' is far from a disaster|url=http://onmilwaukee.com/movies/articles/pompeii.html|publisher=OnMilwaukee.com}}</ref> , [[Tony Scott]]<ref name=labuza />, [[John Hyams]]<ref name=brody />, [[Isaac Florentine]]<ref name=labuza />, [[Neveldine & Taylor]]<ref name=fsr /><ref name=singer />, [[Nimrod Antal]]<ref name=singer />, [[Michael Bay]]<ref name=perez>{{cite web|last=Perez|first=Rodrigo|title=Potentially Dumb & Fun 'Pain & Gain' Overstays Its Welcome With Unrelentingly Dumb & Unfun Tale|url=http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/review-potentially-dumb-fun-pain-gain-overstays-its-welcome-with-unrelentingly-dumb-unfun-familiar-tale-20130424|publisher=The Playlist}}</ref>, [[Jon M. Chu]]<ref name=brody />, [[Russell Mulcahy]]<ref name=shambu>{{cite web|last=Shambu|first=Girish|title=Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://girishshambu.blogspot.com/2013/06/vulgar-auteurism.html|publisher=Girish Shambu}}</ref>, [[Joe Carnahan]]<ref name=ferguson>{{cite web|last=Ferguson|first=Jordan|title=Vulgar Auteurism Needs to Drop the “Vulgar”|url=http://www.soundonsight.org/vulgar-auteurism-needs-to-drop-the-vulgar/|publisher=''Sound on Sight''}}</ref>, and [[Justin Lin]]<ref name=fsr />, as well as more critically respected figures like [[Michael Mann]]<ref name=shambu />, [[John McTiernan]]<ref name=labuza /><ref name=burnett>{{cite web|last=Burnett|first=Colin|title=“Vulgar Auteurism:” Out with the New, In with the Old|url=http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2013/06/11/vulgar-auteurism-out-with-the-new-in-with-the-old/|publisher=''Antenna''}}</ref> , [[Walter Hill]]<ref name=singer />, [[John Carpenter]]<ref name=labuza />, [[Kathryn Bigelow]]<ref name=labuza />, and [[Abel Ferrara]].<ref name=shambu /> |
||
==Origin== |
==Origin== |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Vulgar auteurism derives its name<ref name=brody /> from the [[auteur theory]], a key component of [[film criticism]] which posits that the director is the author ("auteur") of a film and that films should be analyzed in terms of how they fit into a director's larger body of work.<ref name=brody /> Also known as "auteurism," the auteur theory was introduced by French critics associated with the film magazine ''[[Cahiers du cinéma]]'' during the 1950s and popularized in the [[United States]] in the 1960s by [[Andrew Sarris]].<ref name=foundas /> |
Vulgar auteurism derives its name<ref name=brody /> from the [[auteur theory]], a key component of [[film criticism]] which posits that the director is the author ("auteur") of a film and that films should be analyzed in terms of how they fit into a director's larger body of work.<ref name=brody /> Also known as "auteurism," the auteur theory was introduced by French critics associated with the film magazine ''[[Cahiers du cinéma]]'' during the 1950s and popularized in the [[United States]] in the 1960s by [[Andrew Sarris]].<ref name=foundas /> |
||
Several critics, including Richard Brody of ''[[The New Yorker]]'' and Scott Foundas of ''[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]'', have drawn parallels between the earliest French and American proponents of the auteur theory and vulgar auteurism.<ref name=foundas /><ref name=brody /><ref name=burnett /> However, many commentators on the movement consider vulgar auteurism to be distinct from the classical auteur theory, pointing to its concern with visual style over theme.<ref name=fsr /><ref name=labuza /><ref name=shambu /><ref name=burnett /> The question of whether vulgar auteurism is a legitimate separate movement or a subset of the auteur theory remains a source of controversy in the [[film critic]] community.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=fsr /><ref name=burnett /> |
Several critics, including Richard Brody of ''[[The New Yorker]]'' and Scott Foundas of ''[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]'', have drawn parallels between the earliest French and American proponents of the auteur theory and vulgar auteurism.<ref name=foundas /><ref name=brody /><ref name=burnett /> However, many commentators on the movement consider vulgar auteurism to be distinct from the classical auteur theory, pointing to its concern with visual style over theme.<ref name=fsr /><ref name=labuza /><ref name=shambu /><ref name=burnett /> The question of whether vulgar auteurism is a legitimate separate movement or a subset of the auteur theory remains a source of controversy in the [[film critic]] community.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=fsr /><ref name=burnett /><ref name=ferguson /> |
||
According to film critic Peter Labuza, vulgar auteurism "seems to have been an unconscious movement before it ever had a name."<ref name=labuza /> The earliest criticism identified as exhibiting "vulgar auteurism" was published in the Canadian film magazine ''Cinema Scope'' in 2006 and 2007.<ref name=foundas /><ref name=labuza /> ''Cinema Scope'' writer Andrew Tracy coined the term<ref name=foundas /><ref name=labuza /> in his 2009 article, "Vulgar Auteurism: The Case of Michael Mann."<ref name=labuza /> Initially pejorative<ref name=labuza /><ref name=shambu />, the term was repurposed by [[Mubi (website)|Mubi]] user John Lehtonen.<ref name=labuza /> Over the years which followed, Mubi's online film magazine began to publish more and more articles defending genres and directors which were unpopular with the critical mainstream.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=shambu /> |
According to film critic Peter Labuza, vulgar auteurism "seems to have been an unconscious movement before it ever had a name."<ref name=labuza /> The earliest criticism identified as exhibiting "vulgar auteurism" was published in the Canadian film magazine ''Cinema Scope'' in 2006 and 2007.<ref name=foundas /><ref name=labuza /> ''Cinema Scope'' writer Andrew Tracy coined the term<ref name=foundas /><ref name=labuza /> in his 2009 article, "Vulgar Auteurism: The Case of Michael Mann."<ref name=labuza /> Initially pejorative<ref name=labuza /><ref name=shambu />, the term was repurposed by [[Mubi (website)|Mubi]] user John Lehtonen.<ref name=labuza /> Over the years which followed, Mubi's online film magazine began to publish more and more articles defending genres and directors which were unpopular with the critical mainstream.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=shambu /> |
||
Vulgar auteurist ideas gained currency<ref name=labuza /> when one of the movement's proponents, critic [[Ignatiy Vishnevetsky]], became the co-host of the television program ''[[Ebert Presents: At the Movies]]'', produced by [[Roger Ebert]]. However, while "vulgar auteurist" criticism was becoming popular, the term and the movement to which it corresponded remained obscure until the publication of an article by Calum Marsh, "Fast & Furious & Elegant: Justin Lin and the Vulgar Auteurs", in ''[[The Village Voice]]'' on May 24, 2013.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=fsr /><ref name=singer /><ref name=kenigsberg>{{cite web|last=Kenigsberg|first=Ben|title=From the Wire: Pinkerton's Notes on Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://blogs.indiewire.com/criticwire/from-the-wire-pinkertons-notes-on-vulgar-auteurism|publisher=Indiewire}}</ref> |
Vulgar auteurist ideas gained currency<ref name=labuza /> when one of the movement's leading proponents<ref name=patches />, critic [[Ignatiy Vishnevetsky]], became the co-host of the television program ''[[Ebert Presents: At the Movies]]'', produced by [[Roger Ebert]]. However, while "vulgar auteurist" criticism was becoming popular, the term and the movement to which it corresponded remained obscure until the publication of an article by Calum Marsh, "Fast & Furious & Elegant: Justin Lin and the Vulgar Auteurs", in ''[[The Village Voice]]'' on May 24, 2013.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=fsr /><ref name=singer /><ref name=kenigsberg>{{cite web|last=Kenigsberg|first=Ben|title=From the Wire: Pinkerton's Notes on Vulgar Auteurism|url=http://blogs.indiewire.com/criticwire/from-the-wire-pinkertons-notes-on-vulgar-auteurism|publisher=Indiewire}}</ref> |
||
===Controversy=== |
===Controversy=== |
||
Marsh's article was immediately controversial<ref name=labuza /><ref name=singer />. While some took issue with the films and filmmakers being championed by the proponents of vulgar auteurism,<ref name=fsr /> others took issue with the idea that vulgar auteurism was a movement distinct from the auteur theory.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=burnett /> |
Marsh's article was immediately controversial<ref name=labuza /><ref name=singer />. While some took issue with the films and filmmakers being championed by the proponents of vulgar auteurism,<ref name=fsr /> others took issue with the idea that vulgar auteurism was a movement distinct from the auteur theory.<ref name=labuza /><ref name=burnett /><ref name=ferguson /> |
||
One of the most vocal opponents of vulgar auteurism is former ''Village Voice'' critic Nick Pinkerton,<ref name=shambu /><ref name=foundas /><ref name=singer /><ref name=kenigsberg /> who has written essays in praise of directors championed by the movement<ref name=foundas /> and whose 2012 article "The Bigger and Better Mousetraps of [[Paul W.S. Anderson]]" has been described as vulgar auteurist.<ref name=foundas /> Writing in his SundanceNow column following the publication of Marsh's article, Pinkerton described vulgar auteurism as "a shameless attention grab"<ref name=pinkerton>{{cite web|last=Pinkerton|first=Nick|title=BOMBAST #96|url=http://blog.sundancenow.com/weekly-columns/bombast-96|publisher=SundanceNow}}</ref>, adding: "Even more galling is the assumed attitude that the VA position stands alone against a vast, unsympathetic critical conspiracy to marginalize and underrate the products of industrial filmmaking. [...] The numbers, meanwhile, do not bear out claims of a highbrow conspiracy: ''[[Fast & Furious 6]]'', which we’re assured is scorned by critics the world over, currently stands at 61% at [[Metacritic]], above ''[[The Great Gatsby (2013 film)|The Great Gatsby]]'' (54%), and within striking distance of arty jazz like ''[[Simon Killer]]'' and ''[[Post Tenebras Lux]]''."<ref name=pinkerton /> |
One of the most vocal opponents of vulgar auteurism is former ''Village Voice'' critic Nick Pinkerton,<ref name=shambu /><ref name=foundas /><ref name=singer /><ref name=kenigsberg /> who has written essays in praise of directors championed by the movement<ref name=foundas /> and whose 2012 article "The Bigger and Better Mousetraps of [[Paul W.S. Anderson]]" has been described as vulgar auteurist.<ref name=foundas /> Writing in his SundanceNow column following the publication of Marsh's article, Pinkerton described vulgar auteurism as "a shameless attention grab"<ref name=pinkerton>{{cite web|last=Pinkerton|first=Nick|title=BOMBAST #96|url=http://blog.sundancenow.com/weekly-columns/bombast-96|publisher=SundanceNow}}</ref>, adding: "Even more galling is the assumed attitude that the VA position stands alone against a vast, unsympathetic critical conspiracy to marginalize and underrate the products of industrial filmmaking. [...] The numbers, meanwhile, do not bear out claims of a highbrow conspiracy: ''[[Fast & Furious 6]]'', which we’re assured is scorned by critics the world over, currently stands at 61% at [[Metacritic]], above ''[[The Great Gatsby (2013 film)|The Great Gatsby]]'' (54%), and within striking distance of arty jazz like ''[[Simon Killer]]'' and ''[[Post Tenebras Lux]]''."<ref name=pinkerton /> |
||
Revision as of 06:16, 26 February 2014
Vulgar auteurism is a term used to describe an ongoing movement[1][2][3] in film criticism associated with championing or reappraising filmmakers, mostly working in the action genre, whose work has been overlooked or maligned by the critical mainstream.[3][4] Initially associated with the social network and streaming service Mubi[3] and its online film magazine, Notebook,[3] vulgar auteurism became a controversial[2][5] topic in the cinephile community following the publication of an article in the Village Voice in 2013.[3][2][4] It has been described as "a critical movement committed to assessing the 'unserious' artistry of popcorn cinema with absolute seriousness."[6]
Directors whose work is commonly associated with vulgar auteurism include Paul W.S. Anderson[1] [2][6][7] , Tony Scott[3], John Hyams[4], Isaac Florentine[3], Neveldine & Taylor[2][5], Nimrod Antal[5], Michael Bay[8], Jon M. Chu[4], Russell Mulcahy[9], Joe Carnahan[10], and Justin Lin[2], as well as more critically respected figures like Michael Mann[9], John McTiernan[3][11] , Walter Hill[5], John Carpenter[3], Kathryn Bigelow[3], and Abel Ferrara.[9]
Origin
Vulgar auteurism derives its name[4] from the auteur theory, a key component of film criticism which posits that the director is the author ("auteur") of a film and that films should be analyzed in terms of how they fit into a director's larger body of work.[4] Also known as "auteurism," the auteur theory was introduced by French critics associated with the film magazine Cahiers du cinéma during the 1950s and popularized in the United States in the 1960s by Andrew Sarris.[1]
Several critics, including Richard Brody of The New Yorker and Scott Foundas of Variety, have drawn parallels between the earliest French and American proponents of the auteur theory and vulgar auteurism.[1][4][11] However, many commentators on the movement consider vulgar auteurism to be distinct from the classical auteur theory, pointing to its concern with visual style over theme.[2][3][9][11] The question of whether vulgar auteurism is a legitimate separate movement or a subset of the auteur theory remains a source of controversy in the film critic community.[3][2][11][10]
According to film critic Peter Labuza, vulgar auteurism "seems to have been an unconscious movement before it ever had a name."[3] The earliest criticism identified as exhibiting "vulgar auteurism" was published in the Canadian film magazine Cinema Scope in 2006 and 2007.[1][3] Cinema Scope writer Andrew Tracy coined the term[1][3] in his 2009 article, "Vulgar Auteurism: The Case of Michael Mann."[3] Initially pejorative[3][9], the term was repurposed by Mubi user John Lehtonen.[3] Over the years which followed, Mubi's online film magazine began to publish more and more articles defending genres and directors which were unpopular with the critical mainstream.[3][9]
Vulgar auteurist ideas gained currency[3] when one of the movement's leading proponents[6], critic Ignatiy Vishnevetsky, became the co-host of the television program Ebert Presents: At the Movies, produced by Roger Ebert. However, while "vulgar auteurist" criticism was becoming popular, the term and the movement to which it corresponded remained obscure until the publication of an article by Calum Marsh, "Fast & Furious & Elegant: Justin Lin and the Vulgar Auteurs", in The Village Voice on May 24, 2013.[3][2][5][12]
Controversy
Marsh's article was immediately controversial[3][5]. While some took issue with the films and filmmakers being championed by the proponents of vulgar auteurism,[2] others took issue with the idea that vulgar auteurism was a movement distinct from the auteur theory.[3][11][10]
One of the most vocal opponents of vulgar auteurism is former Village Voice critic Nick Pinkerton,[9][1][5][12] who has written essays in praise of directors championed by the movement[1] and whose 2012 article "The Bigger and Better Mousetraps of Paul W.S. Anderson" has been described as vulgar auteurist.[1] Writing in his SundanceNow column following the publication of Marsh's article, Pinkerton described vulgar auteurism as "a shameless attention grab"[13], adding: "Even more galling is the assumed attitude that the VA position stands alone against a vast, unsympathetic critical conspiracy to marginalize and underrate the products of industrial filmmaking. [...] The numbers, meanwhile, do not bear out claims of a highbrow conspiracy: Fast & Furious 6, which we’re assured is scorned by critics the world over, currently stands at 61% at Metacritic, above The Great Gatsby (54%), and within striking distance of arty jazz like Simon Killer and Post Tenebras Lux."[13]
References
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Foundas, Scott. "'Pompeii' doesn't suck: Paul W.S. Anderson and Vulgar Auteurism". Variety.
{{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help) - ^ a b c d e f g h i j Palmer, Landon. "What the Insular Debate About "Vulgar Auteurism" Says About Contemporary Movie Criticism and Cinephilia". Film School Rejects.
{{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help) - ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w Labuza, Peter. "Expressive Esoterica in the 21st Century—Or: What Is Vulgar Auteurism?". LabuzaMovies.com.
- ^ a b c d e f g Brody, Richard. "A Few Thoughts on Vulgar Auteurism". The New Yorker.
{{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help) - ^ a b c d e f g Singer, Matt. "Some Refined Discussion About Vulgar Auteurism". Indiewire.
- ^ a b c Patches, Matt. "The Other Paul Anderson: The Psychotic Action Vision of 'Pompeii' Director Paul W.S. Anderson". Grantland.
- ^ Mueller, Matt. "'Pompeii' is far from a disaster". OnMilwaukee.com.
- ^ Perez, Rodrigo. "Potentially Dumb & Fun 'Pain & Gain' Overstays Its Welcome With Unrelentingly Dumb & Unfun Tale". The Playlist.
- ^ a b c d e f g Shambu, Girish. "Vulgar Auteurism". Girish Shambu.
- ^ a b c Ferguson, Jordan. "Vulgar Auteurism Needs to Drop the "Vulgar"". Sound on Sight.
{{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help) - ^ a b c d e Burnett, Colin. ""Vulgar Auteurism:" Out with the New, In with the Old". Antenna.
{{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help) - ^ a b Kenigsberg, Ben. "From the Wire: Pinkerton's Notes on Vulgar Auteurism". Indiewire.
- ^ a b Pinkerton, Nick. "BOMBAST #96". SundanceNow.