Subject: Excellent Stuff
From: Robin [RHoeher@cfl.rr.com]

Just wanted to let you know that I only today stumbled across your site (through some inane theonering.net link) and spent the last few hours reading it. The site is absolutely, utterly, and completely wonderful. Kudos to you.

P.S.: I love your own top 100 (of course mainly because they show similarities to a list I would create).

P.P.S.: I can't recall when I've ever been so disgusted like I was when I watched The Sweetest Thing. Your review made me laugh out loud.

Subject: Excellent Stuff
From: Robin [RHoeher@cfl.rr.com]

This is the second night I am spending glued to my laptop screen reading your movie reviews.

Fascinating. You are one remarkable woman. I can't believe that you're allegedly not yet making money with this. While your frequent references to bawling your eyes out may be a bit offputting to the national newspapers, your reviews of...

Final Fantasy
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Tomb Raider (oh boy... brilliant)

... are simply the best I've read anywhere. Sharp, intelligent, witty, and most of all very original. My personal favourite (since I owned a version of ELIZA back in the days) though has to be your review of A.I., which nailed not only the emotional distress I felt during the movie, too, but your review was its own art form. You used petty 80's programming to describe the programming depicted in A.I., very clever indeed.

And while I don't always agree with you - which would be extremely boring, too - I always love reading your stuff. Somebody wrote in your fan-mail already, and I can't put it any better: "We have found, to our pleasure, that even when we disagree with your opinion, we still find that your writing is upbeat, sharp, clever, sly, insightful, fair-minded, and most unusually ingenious... Thank you for your honesty, MaryAnn. We enjoy your writing very much, and if we don't agree with you, you're still a hell of a writer. Thanks, again." (Example: I loved Finding Nemo to death, and not only because I went there with my five-year-old daughter.)

You should be showered with money for your work - why do you need to resort to donations and such? Given the crap we read in newspapers, your voice would be one revered not only by me, I'm sure?

I respond:

I think I should be showered with money, too, but unfortunately the real world doesn't seem to agree. I do contribute some reviews to print publications, but it's for pocket change. Not that I'm ungrateful for that pocket change, not at all, but there simply aren't that many paying jobs out there for critics, and they all seem to be full at the moment.

The reader responds:

Well, if it is not the money, maybe you get a kick out of this... A little lame, but still: I heard nothing but bad things about Hulk despite it being from Ang Lee. NYT called it "...incredibly long, incredibly tedious, incredibly turgid" and a colleague called it "dumb"... Being a geek (who's read a few Hulk cartoons two decades ago), I still wanted to see it, but so far always passed it by in the local Blockbuster because my wife refused to want to see it.

Yesterday, I showed her your review of it. She was convinced. We rented it, watched it, and enjoyed it. Very intelligently done, very original scene changes, fresh acting by not-so-overused faces.

Thanks!

I respond:

That's not lame at all. I love hearing stuff like this from my readers -- it means I'm really having some kind of effect. Thanks for telling me.

And I'm really glad you enjoyed Hulk. :->

Two questions.

1. Is the change detection automatic or isn't it?

While it worked on January 1st, it didn't work today... I didn't get a notification that you updated the page and put Big Fish and In America there.

2. Your "pervy hobbit fancier" logo on the page is new, right?

You are not the original pervy hobbit fancier, though, are you? That's Cassie Claire... Or is that you?

I respond:

Change Detection is automatic, but the way it works is the Change Detection site polls my site to see if the home page has been changed. If I update the site right after Change Detection has made its daily poll (and found no change since the last poll), the notification won't go out until it polls again and finds the update.

So: You'll probably get an email overnight or tomorrow morning, notifying you of the new reviews, which you happened to stumble across before Change Detection did.

2. Your "pervy hobbit fancier" logo on the page is new, right?

Just went up today. Though I've been a hobbit fancier since Fellowship. I think I went pervy when I dreamt about Pippin the other night. But the less said about that, the better. :->

You are not the original pervy hobbit fancier, though, are you?

No, she was the original. Or at least, she was the one to coin the phrase. If you Google "pervy hobbit fancier," you'll see it's been adopted by lots of people.

Subject: a critic you're not
From: Julius Rosenberg [ypstwine@hotmail.com]

Please stop calling yourself a critic. You're just a writer. Your reviews simply consist of your sarcastic and cynical comments on a movie. That's not film criticism. Real film critics are Roger Ebert, James Berardinelli, and Ian Waldron-Mantgani. A critic, you're not.

I respond:

What difference does it make what I call myself? Either you appreciate what I write, or you don't. I could call myself a ham sandwich, and it wouldn't change what I write.

Subject: Bad Santa vs. Elf...uh, okay...
From: Paul Wartenberg [wittylibrarian@lycos.com]

...just read your Newton-Wold variation of two Christmas movies gone horribly awry, and I thought to myself...'okay, *someone's* gotten sick of Christmas shopping'...very twisted and very funny (good job on the disclaimer warnings too)

Subject: Buddy the Elf vs. Bad Santa
From: Cathryn Veritas [askewnislasher@yahoo.com]

I read this particular, er, piece yesterday and tried to send feedback, but the computer ate it. When this happens, I generally give it up in despair, so you probably wouldn't have heard from me at all except for the fact that it stayed with me. During the inevitable boring moments at work today, I kept thinking, "Oh Santa, don't you love me anymore?" and bursting into mad giggles. In the middle of a video store. All by myself.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is, thank you for making me look like an insane person. ;) But seriously - this is the kind of humour I'd usually have to rely upon link in my friends' journals to find, and I was absolutely delighted to see it at one of my favourite websites. It's not the first time you've made me laugh to the point of pain, and I'm sure it won't be the last, but it may just be one of the most memorable. Thank you!

Subject: Redarding Agent Elrond
From: John [orangutan@optonline.net]

How, HOW did you manage to resist the urge to to follow 'Missster Aragorn..' with Aragorn saying "My name... is Strider!!"

I respond:

Cuz that's not how Aragorn would talk. :->

Subject: Agent Smith vs. LOTR
From: Mike McNeill [ac.mike@comcast.net]

It was hilarious. Good job. I was wondering why critics weren't commenting on the whole homosexual tension thing between frodo and sam.

I respond:

Because it's not homosexual tension. Can't two men show affection for each other without it being sexual?

The reader responds:

Ummmm, sure. But come on, even Hobbits can only have so much Hobbit lovin goin' on before things feel a bit queer. Don't ya think?

I respond:

No, I don't. :->

Subject: LOTR drinking game
From: Paul Wartenberg [wittylibrarian@lycos.com]

*gasp* I think someone around here has been using christmas rum instead of lemonade for that drinking game of yours again...tsk tsk.

well, at least you didn't do some weird Legolas/Will Turner story line with Johnny Depp showing up muttering 'savvy' half the time...oh dear lord, what did I just do?...

I respond:

Heh heh.

well, at least you didn't do some weird Legolas/Will Turner story line

Saaayyy... great idea.

Actually, I do have something in mind for Pirates of the Caribbean, but it doesn't involve LOTR...

01.07.04

to batch #2 | to batch #4