Andrew Sarris

The class itself has the same structure each week... 1.) Watch a movie 2.) Break (50% of the class leaves... the not so smart ones) 3.) Attendance sheet gets passed around 4.) (50% of those who remained in class through break leave... the smarter ones) 5.) Sarris takes 45 minutes to read a 2 paragraph article, and he uses a magnifying glass to read them. I swear. Sarris, as other reviewers have succinctly (and accurately, of course) put it, is older than sex. His "teaching" is extremely limited, and is confined to reading reviews (by him, and others) and limited discussion by a few people who want to impress a guy who can't hear a single thing they say. Anyway, I think the film list stays pretty consistent from year to year, and there are a ton of great ones on the syllabus. Aside from "classics" like Psycho, The Graduate, and The Godfather, there are some off-beat movies as well. Some that I liked (Petulia, Bunny Lake is Missing) and some (or, I guess, one) I didn't (Nashville) were more fun to watch than the classics sometimes because of their relatively anonymous actors and obscurity. Gotta love the Grateful Dead in Petulia, man! The grading is based on attendance and 2 papers (midterm+final), and your grade will be completely based on your TA and your relationship w/ him/her. My TA was a ridiculous stickler when grading (at least compared to the others), so I was rightfull…

Some people might find Sarris cute, funny, and silly, but if you are actually trying to learn about a famous director like in Auteur Study, Sarris is extremely frustrating. Now 80 years old, Sarris is a legend amount film academics for inventing Auteur theory, but can't teach for shit. He came into the class, maybe talked for five minutes about some trivia, and then after the screening, asked people what they did and did not like about the class. The only insight came from the readings and putting the pieces of the film together myself. Sure it will be nice to say "I took a class from Andrew Sarris" some day at some fancy film dinner, but I wish I could have gotten more out of the class.

He assigns no work, so the workload of the class depends on the TA, who may or may not assign readings and other homework.

Andrew Sarris is about 200 years old. sometimes he closes his eyes mid-sentence and we wonder if he just passed. he is an intelligent, accomplished film reviewer, but it may be time for him to hang the towel on being a professor. hes actually pretty funny sometimes, but definately visibly disabled by his age. classes consist of one movie viewing, a break where most sudents would leave, and then he would read some of his own reviews and others' reviews of the film to the class. some of the movies are pretty good, but some are really boring. the midterm paper and final papers arent too bad, and the grading is generous.

Two 5-8 page papers "on film." NO readings.

Sarris is 78 and looks it. he doesn't really have anything to do with the course other than film selection and comments before and after screenings. However, i really like him. He seems like a genuinely nice guy. he's very unpretentious and has a nice sense of humor. The course is run by the TAs, but Sarris sets a nice laid back tone.

Pretty easy: one Midterm paper 5-7 pps. and one final paper 8-10 pps.

This guy is absolutely hysterical. He is a living legend as a film critic and also as a prof. Sarris told us flat out that he did not want to teach the class, but was forced to. He did have a few nuggets of information but we just watched movies and wrote reviews.

At the first meeting of discussion section for this class, students were asked why they were taking the course. An overwhelming majority said "because Sarris is teaching it." He's a great guy, really funny, and his knowledge is extensive. It's fantastic to take a class with such a renowned film critic, but he is getting along in years, and if you're looking for an in depth analysis of each film and the genre as a whole, you won't find it here. Also, although Sarris encourages participation, he is a bit hard of hearing, so it's often difficult to get your point across, and if he doesn't agree with you, he can be a bit stubborn. However, I would still recommend this class to anyone who wants to get a general idea of what film noir is about from a professor who always makes class fun.

The reviewer who referred to Sarris as a "dotty old man" is on the right track, but Sarris is actually a "dotty old man" who knows film and knows what he's talking about. Though the class should actually be called European Film History instead of "international", the types of screenings were varied and well-chosen. Sarris is a unique teacher in the film department because his expertise is critical, rather than historical or practical. He looks at films differently from the other professors in the department and I was glad to have a professor who didn't gush over a film for it's beauty but would announce to the class why/why not he liked a film. Yes, he rambles, and yes, he's hard to hear and sometimes incoherent, but you have to respect him and his opinions and he's sometimes very funny. He encourages class discussion, asking our own reactions to the films screened. At the end of the semester I was unsure whether I had actually learned anything: I don't think Sarris changes the way his students look at film/react to film/make films. Instead he voices opinions and acts as a sounding board for his students opinions. There is no reading for the class (not necessarily a plus, as reading would have provided me with some direction and feeling of accomplisment). Discussions were laid-back and sometimes included screenings at the TA's discretion of material from outside Europe. Overal…