quote Isabel Quigly's comments on film criticism fve r „, " some
references to Oxford Opinion which made by Penelope Houston in the last issue iv Till and Sound. We feel that these considerably 1"ePres
_ ented our point of view. We do not care
rjles'a' .for.the visual image. Our main concern is with DIct1.11,11g, which should not be looked for only in the of the t .can and should also appear in the structure sound trac"ages, in their light or colour, and in the .k.
tioustri.ethod Style is not just an embellishment; it is by which meaning is expressed. Miss
tcht.toll writes that the cinema is 'not about spatial tati,„,_s.hiPs.' We never said it was. But human re- „ki;s.Ps can be expressed in spatial terms. oar kuough We are concerned with content and do "best to elucidate it, we would never dismiss a iiiiecause we do not like its meaning. Miss saYs that 'the uncommitted approach seems aticall
Y narrow.' but when the committed ap
grow'14”, results in the rejection of films on the viewukts that they do not conform to the critic's 'the human situation,' it is this attitude sues seems narrow. In the postscript to last term's it We said. `To judge a film by its content is to thre'"e critic's own views up against those of the ten,. • • • • "Commitment" [not just political] is trIc L'Ial for the film-maker, but fatal to the critic.' "old by that.—Yours faithfully. (,).kr, IAN A. CAMERON, V. F. PERKINS. MARK SliIVAS rd °Pinion, 3 Antrim Mansions, NH? (,).kr, IAN A. CAMERON, V. F. PERKINS. MARK SliIVAS rd °Pinion, 3 Antrim Mansions, NH?
Previous page
