4/4 There are no Godardian intertitles, no shock cuts (though a couple of beautiful, brief montages), no abstract sound effects, no figures reading from books. Contempt is among his most traditional non-traditional movies.

3/4 in which their voices rarely rise. The camera slides around them as they complete mundane tasks, the tension slowly rising. “Why have you fallen out of love with me?” the writer asks, again and again.

2/4 Bardot and Michel Piccoli are husband and wife; Paul is asked to re-write Fritz Lang’s script of The Odyssey and, even after an abusive outburst from the producer, he pockets the check. The middle section is an astonishing argument between husband and wife

3/3 to a rage and the female secondary character fades in and out of the narrative, present only when she’s needed as a sounding-board or in need of rescue. It was a slog. Never again.

2/3 ction scenes are slowed to a snail’s pace as we read Reacher consider every physical possibility before acting. The wallpaper and furniture in each room must be described in detail. Essential facts are withheld so obviously it brought me

4/4 standard American films, and when it does, it’s not milked or nurtured but disrupted.

3/4 He wants us to be aware at every moment we are watching a film. He constantly reiterates the form, and the viewers place within it—to respond, consider, to think. So, emotion in the film or the viewer doesn’t arise in the same way as

2/4 The landscape is crashing and burning around them; they are neither taken aback nor particularly interested when they meet figures from history, or God himself, and JLG often tests our patience with shots that go on longer than it seems they should.

3/3 until they’re called upon to emote lust or love, then their eyes go dead. You sorta have to love the ending, in its full 80s ridiculousness.

2/3 a villain (though the mother is nearly invisible). The movie frontloads the best dance sequence and everything after is more of the same. Jennifer Grey and Patrick Swayze are fine

3/3 It also includes an appreciation of Eyes Wide Shut, savaged by critics upon its release. The book is humane and enigmatic, reflecting its subject, and lovely to read.

2/3 became a friend. The book, written as a series of articles for Vanity Fair after his death, is not a hagiography. It is an exploration, warts and all, of an artist and his prickly relationship to the world and his work.

3/3 She’s not looking for order or narrative; she’s not trying to make a story. But she believes—deeply—in writing and in the writing itself, and she can hold that belief, and her lack of faith in narrative simultaneously to create work that glows white-hot and tender.

2/3 This book is a kind of memoir, and it is no less controlled or constrained—life spills from it in every page. She doesn’t come to an answer on why she writes but it’s fascinating to read as she picks up one shattered shard of her life after another to examine.

2/2 Lots, really. Once you’ve seen The Devils, Bennedetta, and Ms. 45, the field narrows to mostly soft-core lesbian porn.

2/2 My kneejerk theory is that Southern Grotesque novels became popular because that is how people in other parts of the country wanted—and still want—to view the South. So, the wacky Southern characters and their hijinks began to wane on my quickly. But, True Grit! Read True Grit!