But really I defend him so ardently because, when I first read "The Biographical Dictionary" as a 15 year old, it kind of changed the way I thought about movie criticism and movies in general. "The Big Screen" had a similar effect a few years ago. Dude's a superhero.

I wish I were David Thomson. I got to meet him once after a lecture he gave on "Psycho." Nice guy and smart as a whip.

I recommend reading it before equating it with feces.

Or, for that matter, “Bay of Angels.”

Or you could read his books.

Yes. One of Thomson’s pet themes is the idea that total immersion in cinema doesn’t produce good moviemakers or movie watchers. From the book’s introduction:

For such an easily readable writer, Thomson presents some challenging ideas—ones that aren’t necessarily wrong and, more often than not, more correct than might be preferred. For those of us who grew up on Tarantino, reading Thomson or Richard Brody attack his brand of toxically myopic cinephilia might be upsetting…

Almost all of his stuff is extremely readable. "The Big Screen," especially, is great. But there's also, as another poster pointed out, "Suspects," the Warren Beatty book, the "Psycho" one… the list goes on.

I'm with you on the ghost thing. I don't know why they scare me so much—religion/spirituality is entirely outside of my understanding—but ghost stories have always struck a nerve with me.

We have to qualify Citizen Kane? So which kind of great is, let's say, Hamlet: technical or temporal?

OP: A great movie is a great movie. Anti-boredom goggles not required.

You're right. "Affection" isn't the right word—I meant something closer to "an intimate knowledge of or relationship with…" But if we're talking Parker and Stone, the satirist/parodist thing is a tomato/tomahto situation.

Enjoying something and seeing through it aren't mutually exclusive. (See, for example, "camp.")

Does anyone really like FUNNY GAMES? I admire it as an effective bit of provocation. But it's also a scold and its stuffy superiority is a turnoff.

Of the great Bavarian humorists, Haneke is roughly on par with Eva Braun.

@mikedangelo:disqus
Where was that link for THE TENTH LEVEL supposed to go?

I only meant that he was more subtle than Haneke in that he has a sense of humor. (And a pretty good one too. That Facebook bit in KNOCK KNOCK is worth the price of admission.)

Most satirists have a deep affection for whatever they're satirizing. Parker and Stone do indeed hold a lot of Right-leaning libertarian points of view, but TEAM AMERICA succeeds less in upending the Right circa 2003 than it does the infectious, flag-waving jingoism of Bay/Bruckheimer movies.

@DogSwallow:disqus Aren't you that Stern person who is a mutual FB friend of Byron? Maybe Eli Roth fandom is unique to a very specific time and place. Anyway, weird coincidence.

Only the early, funny ones.