Author: Pauline Kael

Date of Original Publication: 1965 (within the book "I Lost It at the Movies")

Key Concerns/Themes:

• Fragmentation and Incoherence in Film: Kael argues that movies are becoming less coherent, with traditional narrative structures being abandoned in favour of visual stimulation and shock value. This is a central thesis throughout the essay.
• Audience Acceptance of Fragmentation: Audiences, according to Kael, are increasingly accepting of this fragmentation and incoherence. They are no longer primarily interested in following a logical plot.
• Shift in Audience Preferences: Audiences are more interested in "sensations" and "jolts" than in well-developed stories or character motivations. This preference is seen as a driving force behind the changes in filmmaking.
• Commercial Pressures on Filmmaking: Kael suggests that the film industry's focus on profit is leading to the production of movies that are commercially viable but artistically less satisfying. The success of fragmented or shocking films encourages this trend.
• Decline in the Quality of Movies: Kael expresses concern that the trend towards incoherence is leading to a decline in the overall quality of movies.
• Influence of Television: Television viewing habits, with their inherent breaks and emphasis on action over sustained narrative, are presented as a potential contributor to the audience's diminished "narrative sense."
• The Rise of "Cinema" over "Movies": Kael draws a sharp distinction between what she considers engaging and entertaining "movies" and the emerging, more fragmented, and often pretentious "cinema," particularly in art-house circles. "Cinema" is seen as prioritizing technique and abstract ideas over traditional storytelling and audience engagement.
• Ambiguity and Inexplicability as Valued Traits: Both mainstream and art-house audiences and critics are shown to be accepting, and sometimes even valuing, lack of clarity, confusion, and inexplicable elements in films, often interpreting them as complexity or ambiguity.
• Rejection of Traditional Critical Standards: There's a perceived trend among some critics and viewers to reject traditional critical standards based on narrative coherence and meaning, embracing instead a more subjective or even nihilistic approach to film appreciation.
• Loss of Connection to Other Art Forms: Kael fears that as movies become "cinema," they lose their connection to song and dance, drama, and the novel, becoming an object of academic study rather than a widely enjoyed art form.
• The Value of "Kitsch" and "Honest Vulgarity": Kael champions the energy, originality, and excitement found in what might be considered American "kitsch" or "honest vulgarity" in contrast to the perceived pretentiousness and lack of engagement in some "High Culture" cinema.

Pauline Kael's essay is a passionate and somewhat pessimistic critique of the direction she saw movies taking in the mid-1960s. She expresses a strong preference for traditional, coherent storytelling and engaging characters, lamenting the rise of fragmentation, ambiguity, and a focus on technique over substance. Her observations on audience behavior and the influence of commercial pressures and television are particularly insightful. The essay highlights a tension between popular entertainment and artistic pretension in film, and Kael firmly stands on the side of films that connect with audiences through story and feeling, even those that might be considered "kitsch." She foresees a future where "cinema" becomes an isolated academic pursuit rather than a vibrant and accessible art form enjoyed by a broad public.