Pauline Kael
Select another critic »For 828 reviews, this critic has graded:
-
26% higher than the average critic
-
2% same as the average critic
-
72% lower than the average critic
On average, this critic grades 2.8 points lower than other critics.
(0-100 point scale)
Pauline Kael's Scores
- Movies
- TV
| Average review score: | 63 | |
|---|---|---|
| Highest review score: | The Lavender Hill Mob | |
| Lowest review score: | Revolution | |
Score distribution:
-
Positive: 372 out of 828
-
Mixed: 406 out of 828
-
Negative: 50 out of 828
828
movie
reviews
- By Date
- By Critic Score
-
- Pauline Kael
It sounds promising, but Bogdanovich attempts an exercise in style, and the result is sustained clutter.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
What gives this trash a life, what makes it entertaining is clearly that the director, Norman Jewison, and some of those involved, knowing of course that they were working on a silly, shallow script used the chance to have a good time with it.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Though taken from a pulp best-seller, by Stephen King, the movie isn't the scary fun one might hope for from a virtuoso technician like Kubrick. It has a promising opening sequence, and there is some spectacular use of the Steadicam, but Kubrick isn't interested in the people on the screen as individuals. They are his archetypes, and he's using them to make a metaphysical statement about the timelessness of evil. He's telling us that man is a murderer through eternity. Kubrick's involvement in technology distances us from his meaning, though, and while we're watching the film it just doesn't seem to make sense.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Shot in grainy black and white, the material is rather unformed. It's dim and larval, like Danny. Allen leaves us in the uncomfortable position of waiting for laugh lines and character developments that aren't there. The picture has a curdled, Diane Arbus bleakness, but it also has some good fast talk and some push. Allen plugs up the holes with gags that still get laughs; he remembers to pull the old Frank Capra, cutrate Dickens strings, and he keeps things moving along.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
It's a beautifully made gothic-romantic classic, with many memorable scenes.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
When the bland moral rectitude takes over, the film's comedy spirit withers. But there are a lot of enjoyable things.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Byrne is trying for something large scale: a postmodern Nashville. Byrne sets up the material for satirical sequences, yet he doesn't give it a subversive spin. His unacknowledged satire is like a souffle that was never meant to rise.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
This pseudo-Victorian thriller is rather more enjoyable than one might expect, and Bergman is, intermittently, genuinely moving.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
An overblown version of James Hilton's tearstained little gold mine of a book, with songs where they are not needed (and Leslie Bricusse's songs are never needed), yet there's still charm in the story, and Peter O'Toole gives a romantic performance of great distinction as the schoolmaster whose life is transformed by the Cinderella touch of an actress, played now by Petula Clark.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
As the teen-age small-town girl looking for excitement who joins up with a carnival that's traveling through, Jodie Foster has a marvelous sexy bravado. The dialogue, from Thomas Baum's screenplay, is often colorful, but the picture is heavy.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
The attraction of the movie is its friendly, light tone, its affectlessness, and its total lack of humanity. [6 Aug 1984, p.72]- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
The film was infused with an elegiac sense of American failure, and it had a psychedelic pull to it.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
A crisp, tough-minded action film about an international group of mercenaries who stage a coup in a small, decaying West African country run by an Idi Amin-Papa Doc-style despot. The casting of Christopher Walken as Shannon, the leader of the group, gives the film the fuse it needs.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Altman gracefully kisses off the private-eye form in soft, mellow color and volatile images; the cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond is responsible for the offhand visual pyrotechnics (the imagery has great vitality). Gould gives a loose and woolly, strikingly original performance.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
- Pauline Kael
This suave, amusing spy melodrama is directed with so sure a touch that the suspense is charged with wit; it's one of the three or four best things Hitchcock ever did.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Whatever the omissions, the mutilations, the mistakes, this is very likely the most exciting and most alive production of Hamlet you will ever see on the screen.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Once again, a "daring" Hollywood movie exposes social tensions--touches a nerve--and then pours on the sweet nothings. But along the melodramatic way, there are some startling episodes (and one first-rate bit of racial interchange), and recordings by Bix Beiderbecke, Stan Kenton, Bill Holman, and others set quite a pace.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
A glitter sci-fi adventure fantasy that balances the indestructible James Bond with an indestructible cartoon adversary, Jaws (Richard Kiel), who is a great evil windup toy. This is the best of the Bonds starring the self-effacing Roger Moore.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Sloppy, clumsy Hitchcock thriller. Brian Moore is credited with the original screenplay, but probably his friends don't mention it.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
While other B-budget horror producers were still using gorillas, haunted houses, and disembodied arms, Lewton and the director, Jacques Tourneur, employed suggestion, creepy sound effects, and inventive camera angles, leaving everything to the viewers' fear-filled imagination.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Script lacks satiric insolence, and the picture grinds on humorlessly. The villain Christopher Lee's fanged smile is the only attraction.- The New Yorker
-
- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
In movies like this one, Poitier's self-inflicted stereotype of goodness cancels out his acting.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
If audiences enjoy the movie, it's largely because of the elderly actors and the affection that the young director, Ron Howard, shows for them.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Martin Ritt's big, noisy production clunks along like a disjointed play; it defeats Jones, and along the way it also inadvertently exposes the clobber-them-with-guilt tactics of the dramatist, Howard Sackler.- The New Yorker
-
- The New Yorker
-
- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
What's strange about the movie is that the best things in it aren't developed, and what Superman and the other characters do doesn't seem to have any weight. [11 July 1983, p.90]- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
Sean Connery manages to rise above the material; most of the rest of the cast plays in broad style, and there have rarely been so many small, sleazy performances in one movie.- The New Yorker
-
- Pauline Kael
I was surprised at how not-bad it is. It may fall into the category of youth-exploitation movies, but it isn't assaultive, and it's certainly likable. [1 Nov 1982, p.146]- The New Yorker