<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>newcritics - Latest Comments in Sydney Pollack</title><link>http://newcritics.disqus.com/</link><description>the best in web criticism</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:20:02 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Sydney Pollack</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2008/05/27/sydney-pollack/#comment-4869973</link><description>Pollack seemed like such a warm and open person.  Funny thing is I liked him immensely as an actor and as an interviewee, but only so-so as a director.  I really enjoyed his documentary on Frank Gehry.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">OutOfContext</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:20:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sydney Pollack</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2008/05/27/sydney-pollack/#comment-1384696</link><description>Steve, I agree very much about Pollack as an actor; one reason I cited Tootsie was because of his fairly integral role in the proceedings as Michael Dorsey's agent... though I didn't specifically come out and say it. Pollack, as you note, is often the good thing (as an actor) in otherwise so-so films, and he deserves credit for that as well. It would be nice, as a retrospective, to have someone examine Pollack's acting work in itself, separate from his directing, to se what can be seen (something I will now toy with writing... but wouldn't a "Sydney Pollack:Actor" series at Film Forum in New York or something be impressive? Hmmm....).</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">NYC Weboy</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 23:00:06 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sydney Pollack</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2008/05/27/sydney-pollack/#comment-1384695</link><description>Type your comment here.&lt;br&gt;SORRY.  CORRECTED VERSION, MINUS IDIOT TYPOS:  ThereÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s a good reason why Pollack was known as an actorÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s (or starÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s, as the case may be) director: He was a very good actor himself. From appearances in several of his own films, to roles in Woody AllenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Ã¢â‚¬Å“Husbands and Wives,Ã¢â‚¬Â Stanley KubrickÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Ã¢â‚¬Å“Eyes Wide ShutÃ¢â‚¬Â to the final season of Ã¢â‚¬Å“The Sopranos,Ã¢â‚¬Â he put a pretty solid string of performances on screen. He deserves to be remembered for those, too.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Steve Barnes</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 21:47:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sydney Pollack</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2008/05/27/sydney-pollack/#comment-1384691</link><description>There's a good reason why Mr. Pollack was known as and actor's (or star's as the case may be) director. He was a very good actor himself. From appearances  in several of his own films, to roles in Woody Allen's "Husbands and Wives," Stanley Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut" to the final season of "The Sopranos," he put a pretty solid string of performances on screen. He deserve to be remembered for those, too.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Steve Barnes</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 21:39:30 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Sydney Pollack</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2008/05/27/sydney-pollack/#comment-1384693</link><description>The news of Sidney Pollack's death came as such a shock last night. We were used to seeing him in vignettes of older films, sharing his knowledge of film. He seemed to be etarnal.&lt;br&gt;I feel sorry there won't be any new work by Sidney Pollack.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tina oiticica harris</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 19:04:51 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>