Which film critic do you find yourself most in agreement with?

[bhajansunlo]

Like many, I enjoy reading film reviews after watching films since some are insightful, some are funny and some are luxuriously written. Last year I ran into a book by Pauline Kael and was blown away by how much I agreed in some of the assessments of her films especially those which are near universally liked but I did not enjoy. So just a question for you folks, which film critic/s do you feel has the most similar taste to you (may also particular films that made you feel so). For me, it was her views on Clockwork Orange, Raging Bull, and The Shining.

[Luna6ix]

I can't say that I really follow any professional critic. I've always been of the opinion that to qualify to be a film critic, one must love movies of all varieties, and my experience with critics of all types is that their assessments seem to show that they dislike more than they like.

[bhajansunlo]

The ability to appreciate a variety of films usually comes from their wide exposure to films as compared to people who have other day jobs or interests. You cannot one day listen to death metal and understand why people like it without earlier having had some exposure to rock and heavy metal. I think many critics disliking a majority of movies has less to do with the varieties of movies and is more about the fact that most movies have nothing new to add in terms of style/substance and often do not even have an impactful narrative. They end up reviewing so many of these movies is because not only are they supposed to be doing 'film criticism', they are often expected to serve as consumer guides to the movies. The best critics can often put films in context within film history, literature, and current atmosphere. The even better one can help discover films that will not be on the radar of most moviegoers and this push films that are more original.

[paulofilmo]

I think I went on the sight and sound poll and found some hungarian guy with similarish taste to me. couldn't read anything he'd written, but i felt a cosmic bond

[JakeAesthete]

Why read criticism just to flatter one's own prejudices and tastes? I find it much more useful to read critics who's writing styles I enjoy and who's tastes I respect without necessarily having to agree with their opinions of individual films per se.

Nick Pinkerton is easily my favorite young-ish critic who writes consistently these days, and I've learned a lot from older critics like Jonathan Rosenbaum, Adrian Martin, and Kent Jones throughout the years (Jones' Physical Evidence has been an indispensable resource for me). One also shouldn't forget the greats Andrew Sarris and Manny Farber (incidentally Pauline Kael is the one who I really can't stand at all). Elsewhere I can think of specific pieces that have been incredibly useful like Susan Sontag's piece on Hans-Jurgen Syberg's Hitler, and Jon Baskin's writings on Terrence Malick.

[bhajansunlo]

Why read criticism just to flatter one's own prejudices and tastes? I find it much more useful to read critics who's writing styles I enjoy and who's tastes I respect without necessarily having to agree with their opinions of individual films per se.

I agree there is perhaps less usefulness and more of a guilty pleasure aspect in reading critics (or political punditry or whatever) that agree with you. There is though an undeniable satisfaction in finding words that express what you felt but could not pinpoint or articulate. I do also enjoy perspective from writers who differed not only in their taste but in their meaning of what cinema should be about such as Sarris and Richard Brody at the New Yorker.