I doubt that film will ever become the terrain of wealthy patrons. Few are that wealthy to finance a film all by themselves.
As for academics: they have invaded the world of film and there are the usual pluses and minuses. A lot of academic criticism is garbage since it never bothers to ground itself in the experience of the film and gets the actual history of the medium wrong.
> While its true that a few people are "willing to admit the
advantages offered by a trained ear in music or a trained eye in
painting", most people are completely indifferent when it comes
to visual art.
Which is why Kael was so influential. She endorsed the know- nothing approach to cinema. Following Kael, you could be an expert on film simply by sitting your ass down in front of a screen. She appealed to both the laziness in some viewers who wanted a shortcut to expertise and the prententiousness of others who felt that because they were edgerkated in a general way, being knowledgeable about film would be a snap.
> would you recommend some critics and/or texts on Robert
Altman's work?
Check out the piece on Altman on the Senses of Cinema website:
http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/directors/05/altman.html
If you like it, the person who wroite it has a whole book on Altman that expands on what he writes there. There needs to be a lot more done on Altman since most critical texts date from the 1980's and early 1990's and do not cover the late films. More will be published since many Altman films that have been unavailable for years are now able to be seen on dvd (not an ideal method of experiencing a film, but acceptable).
Brian