I'm always searching for interviews with Pauline Kael from the years before she passed away because she often reveals her opinion of recent movies, ones she never reviewed for The New Yorker. She was a great critic; certainly the greatest movie critic ever, and arguably one of the most important critics in any field.
So it was with great joy that I found a transcript of an interview with her from 2001, posted at The New Yorker online. I had read it in hard copy form but long ago tossed that issue.
Kael on Chaplin and Spielberg: I never liked Chaplin, because he made me cry, and I didn't want maudlin feelings at the movies. I was very skeptical of Chaplin, because I thought he pushed too hard. In some ways, he did what Spielberg has been doing: he pushes buttons. And because people like that button pushing, they think Spielberg is a great director. But he's become, I think, a very bad director. Even his best work in "Schindler's List" is very heavy-handed. And I'm a little ashamed for him, because I loved his early work. I loved "The Sugarland Express." And "1941" was a wonderful comedy. It didn't make it with the public, but he should have had enough brains to know it was a terrific piece of work and to not be so apologetic about it. Instead, he turned to virtuous movies. And he's become so uninteresting now. I think of the work he did in "E.T." and "Close Encounters," and I think that he had it in him to become more of a fluid, far-out director. But, instead, he's become a melodramatist.
Kael on independent film and The New Yorker: They thought I was awful for panning the kind of movies I panned, the earnest movies, what's now called the independent film