Movement in latter-day cinephilia and film criticism
Vulgar auteurism is a movement that emerged in early 2010scinephilia andfilm criticism associated with championing or reappraising filmmakers, mostly those working in thehorror,sci-fi andaction genres and whose work has otherwise received little attention or negative reception in the critical mainstream.[1][2] It became a controversial topic in thecinephile community following the publication of an article inThe Village Voice in 2013 and has been described as "a critical movement committed to assessing the 'unserious' artistry of popcorn cinema with absolute seriousness."
According to film critic Peter Labuza, vulgar auteurism "seems to have been an unconscious movement before it ever had a name", as the earliest criticism identified as exhibiting "vulgar auteurism" was published in the Canadian film magazineCinema Scope in 2006 and 2007.[3]Cinema Scope writer Andrew Tracy coined the term in his 2009 article, "Vulgar Auteurism: The Case of Michael Mann".[4] Initially pejorative,[4] the term was repurposed byMUBI user John Lehtonen.[4] Over the years which followed, MUBI's online film magazine began to publish more and more articles defending genres and directors that were unpopular with the critical mainstream.
It derives its name[5] from theauteur theory, a key component offilm criticism which posits that the director is the author ("auteur") of a film and that films should be analyzed in terms of how they fit into a director's larger body of work.[6] Also known as "auteurism", the auteur theory was introduced by French critics associated with the film magazineCahiers du cinéma during the 1950s and popularized in theUnited States in the 1960s byAndrew Sarris.[7]
Several critics, including Richard Brody ofThe New Yorker and Scott Foundas ofVariety, have drawn parallels between the earliest French and American proponents of the auteur theory and vulgar auteurism. However, many commentators on the movement consider vulgar auteurism to be distinct from the classical auteur theory, pointing to its concern with visual style over theme. The question of whether vulgar auteurism is a legitimate separate movement or a subset of the auteur theory is a point of disagreement among film critics.
Vulgar auteurist ideas gained currency when one of the movement's leading proponents,[12] criticIgnatiy Vishnevetsky, became the co-host of the television programEbert Presents: At the Movies, produced byRoger Ebert. However, while "vulgar auteurist" criticism was becoming popular, the term and the movement to which it corresponded remained obscure until the publication of an article by Calum Marsh, "Fast & Furious & Elegant: Justin Lin and the Vulgar Auteurs", inThe Village Voice on May 24, 2013.[13][14]
Marsh's article was immediately controversial.[13] While some took issue with the films and filmmakers being championed by the proponents of vulgar auteurism, others took issue with the idea that vulgar auteurism was a movement distinct from the auteur theory.[4]
FormerVillage Voice critic Nick Pinkerton has been associated with vulgar auteurism, as he has written essays in praise of directors championed by the movement and whose 2012 article "The Bigger and Better Mousetraps ofPaul W. S. Anderson" has been described as vulgar auteurist.[13][14] However, Pinkerton has been critical of the movement; in an article written in response to Marsh's, he decried the term "vulgar auteurism" as "a shameless attention grab", arguing that "no persuasive argument has yet been made for why the phrase should be vitally necessary to modify old, fuddy-duddyAuteurism."[15] He further objected to the argument that film critics routinely panned the works of directors included within the movement, writing, "Fast & Furious 6, which we're assured is scorned by critics the world over, currently stands at 61% atMetacritic, aboveThe Great Gatsby (54%), and within striking distance of arty jazz likeSimon Killer andPost Tenebras Lux."[15]
Soraya Roberts, in her article "Indie Cinema Is Now Genre Cinema" written for the websiteDefector, stated that "Vulgar auteurism has given way to capital auteurism."[16]
^Park-Primiano, Sueyoung (September 5, 2016)."Vulgar Modernism".Routledge Encyclopedia of Modernism. Archived fromthe original on 2024-12-25. Retrieved2025-11-01.
^Hoberman, J. (1982-02-09)."Vulgar Modernism".Artforum. Retrieved2025-11-01.
