So earlier this week I was on a queue to get into a screening, and many of the usual New York suspects are there. My pal Thelma Adams was quizzing me about Zeroville, the dizzying Steve Erickson novel I was reading, and all manner of amiable chitchat ensued as we waited for the publicist to show up. At one point a venerable, oft-times-cranky-in-the-manner-of-"these kids today with their music" critic and man-about-town began enthusing to another party about the film he'd just seen. "This really terrific charming thing, with Dennis Quaid, and Sarah Jessica Parker, and that Juno girl..."
"What movie?" I think it was Thelma who posed the question.
"Smart People," he said. He then paused deliberately, and very slightly cocked an eyebrow. "Smart People...smart movie," he said, with precisely zero irony.
I tell you, I didn't know whether to prostrate myself at the man's feet, or projectile vomit. And I'm still torn, frankly.
I've seen SMART PEOPLE and believe me, vomiting is the only reasonable response.
Posted by: Noel Murray | April 10, 2008 at 12:42 PM
I wish you'd start talking like this at home, Glenn. Would it take so much just to tell me that Tuesday's dinner was "like a feast for the senses," or that the new rug is "a stirring commentary on modern domesticity"?
Posted by: Claire K. | April 10, 2008 at 01:22 PM
Vomit would have been the correct choice here, Glenn. Preferably on Witty McWitterson's shoes.
Posted by: dfear | April 10, 2008 at 01:37 PM
Hmmm....does said critic have an aversion to kimchi?
Posted by: FIlmbrain | April 10, 2008 at 01:41 PM
Well, Filmbrain, in the immortal words of Bugs Bunny: "Mmmm, could be!"
Posted by: Glenn Kenny | April 10, 2008 at 01:47 PM
Could the critic of whom you speak be the same one who said watching "Memoirs of a Geisha" was "like being knocked unconscious by the wing of a butterfly?"
Posted by: Nathan Duke | April 10, 2008 at 02:40 PM
Zeroville is fantastic. Erickson doesn't get the pub he deserves...maybe you can do a longer post on it, GK, when you finish, as I think it would be of great interest to many who read this blog...
Posted by: tuck | April 10, 2008 at 02:43 PM
Again with the cryptic Gene Shalit anecdotes.
Speaking of great novels about films, Glenn, have you ever read "Flicker" by Theodore Roszak? If not, oh, my, you really should.
Posted by: bill | April 10, 2008 at 03:09 PM
I never thought that the three-word review my friend swore he saw Gene Shalit give on the Today Show back in 1990--Goodfellas? Good movie!--would be equaled.
Posted by: cinetrix | April 10, 2008 at 03:11 PM
And I'm totally stealing your genius idea, Claire. How long will it take before the Fesser realizes I'm aping Walter Monheit when I praise his food? When I start affecting a monocle or sooner?
Posted by: cinetrix | April 10, 2008 at 03:26 PM
First of all, I can only think that your "friend" is Horatio Sanz dressed up as Gene Shalit. Second of all, I'm intrigued by the Erickson. The only thing I've read by him that I've loved is the section about the Jean Vigo-like director in Days Between Stations. I'm not a huge fan of Erickson's film criticism, not a huge fan of his novels, but, for some reason, I seem to enjoy it when he writes novels about film.
Posted by: Joel | April 10, 2008 at 05:03 PM
I'll take option C: grevious personal injury.
Posted by: Dan | April 14, 2008 at 03:40 PM