Welcome Stephanie Zacharek, Moveline's New Chief Film Critic!
Fanfare! Confetti! Champagne (but not too much -- it's early)! Movieline is pleased this morning to welcome Stephanie Zacharek to the site as our chief film critic. The veteran of Salon and esteemed member of both the NY Film Critics Circle and the National Society of Film Critics will contribute all her must-read insights on the latest theatrical releases, joining Michelle Orange in reinforcing Movieline's formidable critical chops. What it means for you, Dear Reader, is an even richer compendium of tasteful, generally correct opinions about all things pop-culture. Excited much? Even more exciting: The official press release from MMC World Headquarters follows the jump! Woot!
Movieline Appoints Stephanie Zacharek as Chief Film Critic
NEW YORK, April 12 -- Movieline.com, the fastest growing film, TV and entertainment site on the web, has appointed one of the top film critics in America, Stephanie Zacharek, to its lineup of award-winning writers and editors.
As a member of the elite group of New York Film Critics Circle and The National Society of Film Critics, Zacharek is one of the most successful and experienced practitioners in the business, and a big name in the industry. For the past ten years, she has been a senior writer and film critic for Salon.com. She writes for The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, Entertainment Weekly, Rolling Stone, New York magazine and Sight and Sound. Her work was featured in the 2006 "American Movie Critics," edited by Philip Lopate, and she was a contributor to "A New Literary History of America," published by Harvard University Press in 2009.
Zacharek's opinion on movies is in high demand. She makes regular appearances on popular shows like Charlie Rose, and plays an active role in film festivals. She was a panelist at the Venice Film Festival in 2008 and has worked with the Berlin Film Festival for the past three years as a Talent Campus mentor to young film critics.
Her appointment reinforces the success of Movieline's formula to provide a unique combination of smart, informed and entertaining content to followers of movies, TV and entertainment pop culture, looking for more than aggregated feeds and commentary with little depth or point of view.
Zacharek steps into her new role in April just as Movieline enters into its next stage of growth with expanded content and a fresh new look. Commenting on her move to Movieline, Zacharek said, "Even though there's an enormous number of web sites and blogs devoted to movies and entertainment, the number of sites that take movies and movie criticism seriously is relatively small. In a climate where studio hype too often threatens to crush thoughtful conversation about film, Movieline has proved its commitment to covering movies in a unique and insightful way, and I'm thrilled to be a part of this leading movie destination."
Movieline General Manager and Editorial Director, Charles Runnette added, "We're really delighted to have Stephanie join Movieline. Everyone who reads film criticism knows her as one of the sharpest minds in the business. She's the perfect mix for our site, smart, fun, and knowledgeable. She can debate the merits of an obscure foreign film as effectively as a comic book blockbuster."
Jay Penske, CEO and founder of parent company, MMC, commented, "I'm a big fan of Stephanie's work, she has done what every critic aspires to achieve, her word has become a must-read source for her readers and for the industry in general."
###
Subscribe to the new Movieline on YouTube
Comments
But I thought film criticism was dead? Congrats ... may you prove the web to be a hearty, healthy place for movie criticism. Now, don't let loose with any spoilers and all will be well!
congrats!! i'll be reading!
best,
eug
Wow really? Stephanie is an awful critic who doesn't like anything. I look forward to every movie that she reviews given a 2/10 or 3/10 or maybe even a 4/10!
This is fine news. Stephanie is a thoughtful, entertaining writer, and I am happy to hear she will be providing content to a site I actually visit every day, rather than Salon, which I visited when I remembered that it existed. But, like Edward, I am a little disturbed by the mugshot -- er, photo.
Fantastic! Love her reviews. But jeez, why the snark for pale ladies?
WOOOOOOOOO!!! This is the best online news I've heard in a long time. Now sadly, I have almost no reason to visit salon.
Stephanie Zacharek's hilarious reviews were the best part of Salon (second-best: Ask the Pilot!) and I'm delighted to get to read them here at Movieline, where I won't be distracted with links to posts about current affairs or feminism.
Wow. Movieline just keeps upping the ante. **applause**
Zacharek may be the only working critic badass enough to get under the skin of Quentin Tarantino, a guy who famously prides himself on being smarter than 99.9% of movie critics.
Penske's looking like a genius here.
"generally correct opinions"
So, should I explain what is wrong with that phrase or..?
Great! Zacharek earned my respect for being one of the only critics willing to point out the glaring flaws in The Dark Knight was in was released.
This is a reference to the time Movieline labeled "Avatar" as a "filmic turd" which was "destined for the bargain bin at Wal-mart."
Or am I remembering wrong? Or maybe just lying?
On the plus side, maybe Salon will replace her with someone who likes a movie once in a while.
Seriously, she's the Pitchfork of movie reviewers.
I want Charlie also
(Taylor if someone does not know)
Mazel Tov, Stephanie!
This is great news. As some other commenters have suggested, Stephanie's reviews had become nearly my last must-reads at Salon (not, sadly, like the old days there...), and, like Reini Urban, I think it would be great to have Charlie Taylor back, too. For those who complain that SZ, "...doesn't like anything," I'd just call their attention to her farewell column at Salon, and her special thanks to her readers who disagree with her. A movie worth an argument is probably a movie worth seeing, so hooray for the provocations to come!
Oh I am so happy. I practically had to take to my bed when I read that Stephanie was leaving Salon--not that I understand how she stood it as long as she did; with the exception of Glenn Greenwald, Salon has fallen on hard and dimwitted times--so I am thrilled to find her reviews here. And it's nonsense that she hated everything. She turned me on to movies like "Ghost Town," which I never would have seen without having read her review. She loved it, and I did too.
What makes her different, besides the fact that she can write better than any other film critic of the last decade (except maybe for her husband, and I agree, can't we have him too) is that she does not jump on the band wagon. Too bad if everyone raved about that turgid, didactic bore "There Will Be Blood," she didn't and wouldn't. Shades of the great Pauline Kael, a critic with wit, savvy and backbone. Wonderful choice Movie Line!
Stephanie Zacharek is a joke: no talent, no integrity, no ability to do anything but constantly parrot Pauline Kael. Snark, condescension, and adolescent sarcasm in the place of wit and insight are Zacharek's modus operandi. True, she can occasionally SOUND intelligent, but that's only because Kael was, at her best, quite a smart cookie, so anyone who constantly copies her opinions will inevitably be the old "stopped clock" at least once in a blue moon. That doesn't change the fact Kael was wrong at least as often as she was right, so anyone who parrots her every last opinion is going to come off as a fraud - which Zacharek unquestionably is. Kael was obtuse about many filmmakers, but her one virtue was that she made up her own mind about things - too bad Zacharek has every one of Kael's qualities except her best one: her independence of mind.
Great news. I've been looking for her reviews on rotten tomato for a few weeks now.
Glad to hear she is still around. Otherwise, I'd have to read critics that blindly praise every turd that comes out of Hollywood. Stephanie keeps it real and doesn't buy into the hype. She shreds the majority of movies that come out of Hollywood to pieces because the reality is, the majority of movies that come out are just plain awful.
"Stephanie keeps it real and doesn't buy into the hype."
Oh really? So praising such titles as Transporter 3, Night at the Museum, 17 Again, and High School Musical 3, is keeping it real and sticking it to the Man? On what planet? Stephanie has praised as many turds as any quote whore - they just aren't the usual suspects - her trashy aesthetic is shaped by the grotesquely overrated Pauline Kael, rather than Leonard Maltin and Entertainment Tonight. But who cares if she stuck it to James Cameron and Chris Nolan and took a pass on Avatar and The Dark Knight, when Transporter 3 turns out to be her vision of cinema's possibilities? So she's as bad as anyone else, her bad taste merely takes different forms than most.
She has nothing of importance to say about any of the great artists of cinema, and what little she does say is usually lunk-headed drivel.
After reading her inane pan of Terrence Malick's The New World (a masterpiece - though one too hard for Zacharek's ADHD attention span and crudely limited imagination), I'm glad she normally ignores most arthouse films altogether. Since she almost always gets them wrong, better she sticks to the simple pleasures of High School Musical 3. Anything that actually requires serious thought is quite beyond her capacitities.
I for one, find Stephanie's take very fresh and true. Guess what, I didn't like The Dark Knight either. And I thought Transporter 3, although flawed in some ways, overall a better movie. Why? I thought the action was better, I thought the story tighter and better paced and structured (although as expected, there was little character development). I still don't really understand why people are saying The Dark Knight is so great. The story was poorly structured, meandering, with no real arc for any of the characters (except for possibly Two-Face) of which there were too many. With two exceptions (you know which two) the acting was also uniformly flat.
I knew Stephanie was a critic after my own heart when I read her review of "Moulin Rouge". She got the movie and I did too. Say what you will Chris, many people appreciate what she has to say about movies and that is a pretty cool way to make a living. I'm incredibly happy that she is continuing her career. How many people appreciate your bile?
"I'm incredibly happy that she is continuing her career. How many people appreciate your bile?"
Well, guess what, quite a few people openly loathe Zacharek and think she's a fraud. You may not have encountered them, but if you'd take a couple seconds to do your homework, you'd see I'm far from alone in my estimation of her. They're out there, plenty of them: take a google and see for yourself.
There is not some transcendent virtue in the reams & reams of trash and junk Zacharek raves about. She merely picks a different title, so while Entertainment Tonight or Roger Ebert may say to go see The Dark Knight, Zacharek snidely scoffs at the supposed dullards who follow their lead, but then merely picks Transporter 3 or Spiderman instead. I didnt love The Dark Knight either & have no desire to watch it again. That's not the point. The point is: she has delusional fanboys and fangirls who think because she panned some overpraised movie she must be a great critic. No. Because she then turns around and praises some OTHER complete piece of junk.
The real issue is not that she picked Spiderman instead of Batman, or Night at the Museum instead of Avatar, it's that she a) has praised as many lousy movies as any critic in the business bar bottom-feeding junket whores b) is regularly dismissive of genuinely great work (i.e. setting aside the whole issue of summer blockbusters, she's usually useless on ACTUAL ART as opposed to escapist entertainment) and c) she takes all - and I do mean ALL - her opinions from Pauline Kael, so the only time she offers a surprising take is when it's on a picture where Kael's reaction is impossible to guess (i.e. for Zacharek to write something of interest, it has to be a film by a director who wasn't yet working when Kael was still alive, because that's the only time Zacharek ever wakes up from her Stockholm-Kael Syndrome).
Any critic who cannot think for herself, but relies on a guru - in this case, Kael - is inherently too much of a partisan to be of value. Zacharek walks into the theater with a closed mind, determined to see nothing of value in the filmmakers Kael ruled persona non grata years ago. In that sense, Zacharek is merely the mirror image of an equally worthless hack like, for example, the San Diego Reader's Duncan Shepherd (who has wildly different tastes than Zacharek). For Shepherd, Clint Eastwood can do no wrong. For Zacharek, Eastwood can do no right. Shepherd's review of Mystic River is embarrasing in its obtuseness, because he found not a single flaw in it, and claimed it was the supreme filmic achievement of the decade. Zacharek's review of Letters From Iwo Jima is equally embarrassing, because she went into the theater determined TO find flaws, and to magnify every last one (for this reason: Saint Pauline hated Clint, so Zacharek, servile zombie Kael-sycophant that she is, has to follow suit). Zacharek sees Eastwood's name and goes into nitpicker, ax-grinder mode. Shepherd sees Eastwood's name and goes into hagiographer mode. I don't give a flying fuck whether you like or dislike Eastwood: but if you're so blindly partisan ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, then have the balls to recuse yourself. Don't pretend you're a legitimate critic, because you're not. You're a blindly driven partisan.
It is THAT aspect of Zacharek and Shepherd alike that is equally contemptible in both. It is not their opinions but the dishonest, mendacious manner they arrive at their opinons that I object to.
Stephanie is used in Entertainment Weekly in the Critic's report of film grades. Ultimately she is like the Russian Judge, usually going against conventional wisdom.
While diverse opinions are laudable, don't use her as your only source for film reviews.
Good post, thanks. Would you clarify the first part in additional detail please?
Wow, Lady Gaga won 8 VMA prizes this year! I am extremely proud of her wins and I enjoyed the Born This Way song GaGa sung too!
Next »