| home |
RSS feed | ||
 | ||
|
Reader Mail
selected reader mail from mid September through early October 2001 | ||
find the latest reviews at the new home page
 get your daily movie dose at the Cinemarati blog
| |
Subject: Joe Dirt is charmin...you will want to squeeze him Dear you, I love movies. Your site has become the first review site that I check. Why is this? Cause we always agree. I check your site after I see the movie cause I am always curious what you thought. I always end up reading it aloud to my gf because you back me up. The latest examples would be Moulin Rouge and Redux (which is as great as you say but is not better cause the sex-favor scenes or the French). Anyway...to the point...you had not seen Joe Dirt...very entertaining movie. I did not say good. I had a free rental from Blockbuster and said what the heck..."I like him in that sitcom and the movie got some positive reviews." Amazing flaws in this movie...did the director show up every day?...was there a director? But you will love Joe Dirt...one of the funniest characters in years. You will never forget the character or some of the big laughs. It is so bad/good I promise that you will love it as I did. I respond: 1) You shouldn't assume that just because I didn't review movie that I didn't see it. 2) You "promise" I will love Joe Dirt? What will you give me if I don't love it? The reader responds: Who pissed in your Cheerios? If you had seen it, you would have written about it. It was a major release which people want an opinion on...and it is so good/bad that your major problem would have been how to limit the length of your review. If it was Mondo New York then I would expect you to say nothing and just enjoy/hate an oddball movie that nobody else will see and is not found covering large sections of your local Blockbuster. 2) You "promise" I will love *Joe Dirt*? What will you give me if I don't love it? I will give you a fresh box of *Cheerios*!
I respond: Who pissed in your Cheerios? You did. I see many more movies than I review. I don't get paid for my work on my site, therefore the amount of time I can spend on it is limited. Look around my site and you'll see that I review lots of films that get only extremely limited releases -- I've even reviewed films that haven't yet gotten even limited releases -- and I have not reviewed many wide releases. I will give you a fresh box of *Cheerios*! That's not enough for me to spend any amount of time discussing a David Spade moive. Sorry. The reader responds: good thing you are allowed to be rude as hell! I respond: Excuse me? The reader responds: oh sorry you must be hit and run rude i had written an e mail basically saying that i liked your site and we thought the same i had just watched a movie that i expected nothing from but really enjoyed it it was a david spade movie joe dirt i e mailed you cause i had looked for a review and saw none you e mailed back in a rude way so i e mailed back asking who pissed in your cheerios you answered again rudely and tried to explain yourself talking about you see lots etc that you do not review etc but ended it with that you would rather wear a bra than review a david spade movie or something like that i get confused and that is all i have to say about that ps sorry for lack of whatever but why should i bother biatch I respond: You emailed your "good thing you are allowed to be rude as hell!" comment on a day on which most of my email was from people all over the world begging to know that I was okay, and not a victim of the horrible events in New York on Tuesday, and you gave no indication whatsoever what your comment was in reference to. So forgive my confusion. I'm getting sick and tired of having to defend the way I run my site to people like you. If you want to think I'm rude, go ahead and think it. I don't care.
Subject: reader mail [My replies interspersed in bold--MAJ] Do you only post the mail from really pissed off readers or do that many people really disagree with you about Pitch Black? I've posted mail from people who agree with me on Pitch Black, and I've posted mail from people who disagree but can articulate and back up their opinions intelligently. But neither of those types are anywhere near as amusing as the idiots. The first few lines of that review were printed in Yahoo movies and they were so good that I went to your site to read the whole review and have been compulsively reading your reviews ever since. (By the way, I haven't seen you listed on Yahoo's list o' critics lately. Did they stop listing you? Yahoo! stopped posting links to most online critics a while back and are focusing almost entirely on links to reviews from print magazines and newspapers. So that no one missed the boring bullshit from the Podunk Daily Tribune, I guess. I always hoped that maybe people would go to your site like I did and then maybe the world would be saved and Jerry Bruckheimer would never work again.) I think you underestimate Bruckheimer's power in Hollywood, and far, far overestimate mine. But thanks for the sentiment. I've never seen Pitch Black, but your review of it is wonderful. And how come the people who most violently disagree with you never make any sense? A thinkthank of social scientists is working on that question as we speak. A dramatic breakthrough in their research is expected any decade now. They always seem to say the same things, that always basically amount to "Oh yeah, well I liked it, so you suck." I don't always agree with you, but your reviews are always i nteresting and well-thought out. I often read your reviews of movies I have no intention of ever seeing, because they're always so good. I was gonna write a letter that made real points rather than just gushing about how great you are, Gushing is fine. Thank you. but I lost track of time reading stuff at your site and now I've gotta go, but I wanted to say that I loved your Pitch Black review, think you're absolutely right about The Mummy (there's a guy I used to go to school with who looks exactly like a thin Oded Fehr. I think he's teaching elementary school now.), your review of The Musketeer cracked me up, and you can add me to the list of now 5 people in America who hate Julia Roberts movies. (although I did like Hook...) Thanks so much for all your insightful reviews. You're welcome.
Subject: Just another bit of fan-mail. [My replies interspersed in bold--MAJ] Hi there, I'm going to cover a lot of bases in this e-mail, so I'll just jump disjointedly from point to point. Thought I'd warn you. :) Okay. I've been reading your site for a couple of months now, having stumbled across it while surfing one day (I hate to tell you I've completely forgotten how, I'm sure you could have used that knowledge). I enjoy your reviews immensely, in part because you seem to share a lot of my own dissatisfaction with popular films. Thanks. Glad you're enjoying the site. I was wondering whether you take suggestions for reviews. Seeing only one way to find out, I thought I'd write. I'd love to see what you thought of more of the Coen brothers' films, in particular The Big Lebowski and Miller's Crossing, and Jim Jarmusch's Ghost Dog: Way of the Samurai and Dead Man. There are other films that I've thought of suggesting while reading your site, but you obviously can't get to them all... one or two of the above would sate my curiousity. I don't take suggestions, only because that's all I'd end up doing if I did. But I'll tell you this for free: I generally adore the Coen Brothers and don't care too much for Jarmusch. And I'll keep your suggestions in mind when I'm considering older films to review. I noticed you put in a couple of pictures when you reviewed The Musketeer and Rock Star. I have to tell you that this really didn't add to the review for me... you may have been attempting to illustrate the 'crotch-grabbing' theme, but I don't feel your reviews need the extra humour that a snappy caption and screen shot might give. You do fine on your own, and pictures just detract from it, in my opinion. Others may differ, but hey, you'll end up doing what you think is best, and I'll read it anyway. Just thought I'd share my two bits. As you see from my site, adding photos to reviews is extremely unusual for me. But I just couldn't ignore the hiliarious crotch coincidence. In the 'Unwanted Suggestions' category, I was thinking idly that I'd like to see personality spotlights from time to time. Maybe you could pick an actress or producer you like/dislike (although, scathing reviews aside, I'd much rather read about what you like) and just give a rundown of what you thought of some of their career highlights, low-points, etc. Just little things like "See them in such-and-such," "avoid this one," "this one came when they were going through a bad period in their life," blah blah. That's just an idle thought. It's a great idea, and when they add eight hours to each day, then I'll consider it. You have to remember that I don't get paid for my work on the site, so that limits how much time I can devote to it. And I'm already devoting too much time to it. You asked whether giving access to your screenplays would entice me into subscribing to Cinematic Musings. Probably not, unfortunately... it's a fair penny to pay, at least in my cash-strapped POV. Something that may help your subscription rate is providing a sample issue for free on the site... if people see what they can get for their dollar, they may decide it's worth it after all. Honestly, that's part of the reason I haven't subscribed. I'll give it some thought. Thanks. Finally, a technical thing. Some of your pages, when I hit the 'Back' button on my browser, reload themselves, and I end up on the same page, having to hit back twice quickly to get to the page before. This is obviously not a crippling problem that leaves me weeping in agony, but I thought you might like to know about any glitch, no matter how minor. :) It's not really a glitch. What's happening is that there are .html pages that have instant forwards to .shtml pages. When you hit the back button, you're reloading that .html page, which instantly reloads the .shtml page. I don't think there's anyway around this except to use the Go menu (which is what it's called on Netscape -- I've no idea what it is on Explorer, but it's the menu that lists the last viewed pages). I have to keep those .html pages because there are thousands of links to my individual reviews all over the Internet, linked to reviews that were originally .html, and deleting those .html pages means I'd lose a lot of traffic. So there you go. :) Thanks for listening, and keep up the good reviewing! I can't wait to read your review of Lord of the Rings before I hit the theatre... I can't wait to see LOTR either.
Subject: Cast Away [My replies interspersed in bold--MAJ] I read your review of Cast Away, and I must say that I thought it was rather dull. I don't want to come across like I could do better. I'm sure that writing reviews for such a barrage of films would get taxing to say the least, so maybe you were just a little tired and just wanted to get done with it. I'm sorry you thought my review dull, but if I were just tired and wanted to get done with it, why would I have even bothered to write the damn review in the first place? No one pays me for these reviews. If I don't want to review something, I don't have to review it. And the minute I realize I'm just going through the motions and it's no fun anymore is the minute I stop writing reviews. At any rate, I have a question/comment about the film. I was just wanting to get your opinion on what the deal was with that box that he didn't open. To me, it represented God, along with the whale that followed him out in the ocean. I thought he was just struck by the illustration of the wings on the packaging. I don't see any "God" in this film... cuz then you'd have to wonder where the hell "God" was that he let the plane go down and let Chuck be stranded alone on an island in the middle of nowhere for four years. I hope nothing I said was offensive, becuase I love your website and I really enjoy getting another person's perspective on films. Thanks, -Adam Nothing offended me. The reader responds: God, which is such a vague term, doesn't necessarily mean some entity that comes and plays around in the material world in which we live. Words are just symbols, and God is one that has such a subjective interpretation. Maybe you saw the word God and had no idea of what that word meant to me, That does tend to be a problem with a word that means so many different things to different people. the one who suggested it being an intregal part of the film. Maybe a less disputed term that would leave less filtration in our communication would have been to say that it represented "hope". To me, "God" and "hope" mean entirely different things. After reading your reviews I really thought you'd have more to say about a part of the movie which to me was so emphasized. Since you recognize that "God" means so many different things, why would you think that someone else would see the things you think are related to your definition of "God"? When you say that the wings "struck" him, do you mean they inspired him? I suppose. The time and effort and creativity that went into the doodle on the box made it more than just a package to him... and even the unadorned packages were already sort of sacred to him. I guess I was just looking for more of a symbolic interpretation of that part of the film. Anyway, I really do appreciate you taking the time to respond to your viewers. Thanks. I haven't seen the film again since I reviewed it, so I'm sure there are nuances I'm not remembering. I really can't talk in depth about the film until I see it again.
Subject: 729!? Congrats! 09.07.01: Exactly four years ago tomorrow, The Flick Filosopher was born. In those four years, I've written 729 film reviews. I must be insane. You are insane, MaryAnn, and that is exactly why I like you. You have a love, a passion, and you *pursue* it. You only appear insane when held against the backdrop of mediocrity which are the lives of most. Compared to playwrights, poets, authors, artists and musicians, you are simply doing your thing. You dream, and you work for that dream. People who do not pursue creativity, who do not make their dreams manifest are not aware of how hard it is, how the long hours, how looming the doubts. Being considered insane in this way by our society is a high compliment. Means you're on the right path. Loved your review of The Musketeer. Once again, thankyou thankyou thankyou for telling it like it is. I saw Ghost World based on your review. Good film. Bittersweet, like really good chocolate. I'm not sure how I feel about the enigmatic ending. I wanted there to be more signs of such magic in the story, little things that Enid missed, you know, good enigmatic dramatic irony. We know something the character doesn't, only we aren't entirely sure it's real either, until the very end. I knew a bus was going to come for Norman after she talked with him the first time. It seemed right somehow, but I would have preferred that the movie end after he got on a bus and left. Actually having a bus come for her was too much. I wanted his leaving to be an epiphany for Enid, for what she lacked was wonder. All she needed was one transcendent, otherworldly moment to kick her into gear, into life. I had chills when the bus came for Norman. I didn't need an explanation for his leaving, but I did for her. I kept asking, why did it come so soon for her, but he had to wait? For magic to work in a story it has to be internally consistent, and that wasn't. I respond: Well, I'm not sure if other people consider me insane, but I wonder about myself sometimes. Yes, I am following my bliss, and it's nice to know that at least some people understand that that's not always blissful! Still, I can't imagine not following the path I'm on. Perhaps the bus doesn't come until you're ready for it? I think the film needed that ending. We needed to know that Enid was at least on the beginning of the path to her true life. If we'd left the movie with her still stuck at home, we'd never know whether she had the courage to leave the safe, known world behind.
Subject: Hey Hey, you might've answered this question before, and if you have, I apologize. Have you considered getting a rating scale to rate your movies with? It'd kind of be a quick guide to your opinions, and would be convenient to many people. and
Subject: No Rating System? I just found your website. Do you have a numerical rating system? Just curious. I respond: Nope. I don't believe my reaction to a movie can be reduced to a number.
Subject: What's up ladies? From FlickFilosopher reader mail the week of August 18-24, 2001, Amy Buttery writes: "...My husband is getting annoyed at my insistence that he read every review of yours that I do, even if we have no intention of seeing the movie or video. (I keep thinking he'll get hooked on you like I have, but maybe it's a girl thing..." Just wanted to let you and Amy know that it is definately NOT a girl thing. This guy visits this site at least once a day just waiting for the next review to appear and I am always happy when it does. I have forgotten all other critics exist because MaryAnn's reviews are just too good and fall in line with my tastes, way more often than not, and even when I disagree, I can see her points. People occasionally ask what my favorite movie of all time is. Although I am not sure exactly, I have about a dozen or so films that I know I would prefer to watch more than any others ever made, and to me, that makes them the best of all time. Just like MaryAnn, if the movie does not entertain me as a whole, I am not going to like it, regardless of what individual parts make up the movie. And to Amy, you have problems with your husband getting annoyed? My wife calls the FlickFilosopher, my "movie whore" (in a joking about MAJ being my mistress sort of meaning, not hooker meaning). She rolled her eyes at the mere mention of what the great MAJ thinks. Funny...lately she has not been saying that as much and is actually asking me what my "movie whore" said about it. She laughs when I read the reviews, etc. I think she is in denial...she likes the flickfilosopher, but can't bring herself to say it. And natch, keep up the good work! Jay Payne PS: I asked you almost 2 years ago to review the movie Scrooge with Albert Finney, because it was my favorite Christmas Carol version. You did last year, and although you did not like it, thank you for doing so. |
| ||
| home |
RSS feed | ||