Subject: [none]
From: Clark Carter [ninenazgul@mchsi.com]

I absolutely adored your review of Cold Mountain. I am a huge Lord Of The Rings fan and the emotion you feel for the film really came through in your explanation of why Cold Mountain couldn't cut it for you. I don't usually write e-mails to strangers like this but after I read your review and felt the heart-tug that you (and I) felt during the film, I just wanted to let you know how great it was.

Subject: Well Done!
From: Kimberley M. Sanders [kimmb_@yahoo.com]

I just wanted to thank you for your amazingly funny and great reviews and to let you know that you're probably the only film reviewer out there I can trust. Maybe it's because our interests seem to converge-at least, I think we have the Britcom, MSTie, and Tolkien geek things in common-or maybe it's just because I'll be forever mad at Roger Ebert after he said of "The Return of the King":

"...one feels at the end that nothing actual and human has been at stake; cartoon characters in a fantasy world have been brought along about as far as it is possible for them to come, and while we applaud the achievement, the trilogy is more a work for adolescents (of all ages) than for those hungering for truthful emotion thoughtfully paid for."

I mean, I know reviewing is subjective, but come on! I can't think I wept through that movie because I'm a 24-year-old adolescent!

The thing I like most about your reviews, and your review of "Cold Mountain" really is a great example of this, is that they are honest reactions. After seeing ROTK nothing else can possibly upset me either, and every movie I go into after that will be seen through the lens of Sam carrying Frodo up Mt. Doom. I can't prevent that, and I loved that you couldn't either. It makes your reviews so much more believable and relevant to the bulk of people that watch movies. I forwarded your ROTK and "Cold Mountain" reviews to everyone I know who's a fan and they all agreed. My mother actually cried when she read your ROTK review. I know that may be small consolation for the tons of mail you seem to get (judging from your reader mail section) from the masses of idiots on the Internet, but I hope it proves that you're not wholly unappreciated.

And on a related note, I will be eternally grateful for your review of "Kill Bill Vol.1", which is the only review I have seen that agrees with me that Quentin Tarantino's biggest fan is himself.

Keep up the great work, and I hope that someday more people will appreciate your honesty and most of all your bias.

PS I am sending a little late Christmas present (or perhaps it can be a New Year's present) along though PayPal (I hope you got it!). I meant to send it before your fundraiser deadline, but things got away from me-you know how it is. It's not as much as I would like to send (movies in NYC must be an extravagance I can only guess at), but I did want to express my appreciation with something other than E-mail. If Roger Ebert can get paid for saying ROTK is a cartoon for adolescents, then you definitely should be paid for saying it's not!

Subject: LOVED your review of Cold Mountain
From: Halyna Saciuk [anborn1@yahoo.com]

I haven't actually seen Cold Mountain and I probably won't ever see it, not even on DVD. But I LOVED your review nevertheless, because you articulated so perfectly how I feel about Return of the King and why other current movies pale into insignificance when compared to it. It's so much MORE than mere fantasy; it's about profound and noble apects of human nature that just don't much publicity or air time these days. It's tres chic to be blase and cynical about such things, but such things elevate us as human beings, they show what we can be at our best, and that's why they matter. It's too rare nowadays to have virtues like loyalty, love, compassion and honour celebrated - they're awfully hard to live up to and can be darned uncomfortable to boot; sometimes they're just not any fun!! Jumping off my soapbox, but I wanted to say thank you for getting it, and having the courage to say it!! You rock!! and have a happy New Year.

Subject: Your Cold Mountain Review re: RoTK
From: Karl Janot [ultimo@telusplanet.net]

read your review of Cold Mountain and must say, I laughed myself silly. For like you, I too have been enraptured by the Return of the King's significant emotional power. No other movie seems to matter at this moment. I will give it time. Thanks for the review. :)

Subject: Comment re: Cold Mountain
From: dryad [dryad@puritycontrol.co.uk]

No, I haven't seen the movie, but I did read the book, and based on the book - which left me just as cold as the title - and your review, I have no intention of seeing the movie, either. Which is a pity, as I like Law and Kidman as well.

Anyhoo, what I really wanted to say was that everything you wrote about the movie is absolutely true for the book as well, which I read when first it came out (reviewed by Oprah?? By the bye, I highly recommend avoiding all Oprah's Book Club books - not because they're badly written, but because they have a tendency to be Overly Dramatic and will make you hurl them against the wall, wishing you could slap the author to boot. But I digress). Ada is the most interesting character in the book, and her relationship with Ruby (whom I thought was black or at least mixed) is equally ingrossing. Inman, well, he just kind of made me shrug my shoulders and say 'whatever'. The 'great romance' of the book was severely lacking, and I can't say I'm surprised that the movie is left wanting as well.

Dryad, who also skipped Mystic River after reading the book and hurling it across the room (because angst for angst's sake and watching self-aggrandizing, unlikeable criminal losers 'win' just isn't her cup of tea, and not even that kind of cast can make her watch it!)

I respond:

Actually, my comment about Cold Mountain being approved by Oprah was sorta sarcastic, but probably only someone who'd read tons of my reviews would have picked up on that. :->

I liked Mystic River the movie much more than Cold Mountain, and I actually did get emotionally involved with the characters in that one.

Subject: Watching Cold Mountain after the Lord of the ring
From: Philippe [valphy@club.lemonde.fr]

In your critique of Cold Mountain you said:

"I've seen Samwise Gamgee carrying Frodo Baggins up the slopes of Mount Doom. I've seen Faramir, captain of Gondor, ride to what he believes will be his death merely to earn the love of his father. I've seen Peregrin Took leap onto a burning pyre to save a dying man he doesn't know in repayment for a debt owed that man's dead brother. I've seen an entire world shrink into molecules of fading hope and acts of selfless love. After that, how can the troubles of one Confederate soldier and one Southern belle amount to even a hill of beans in this crazy world? Nothing they can say could upset me."

Yes, but at least confederates soldiers and southern belles are/were real people I can't identify with . Freaking hobbits and elves are NOT!

Still I was not that crazy about the movie.

I respond:

They're real within the world of The Lord of the Rings, and they're real within the imaginations of everyone involved in making those films. That's all that matters.

The reader responds:

They're real within the world of The Lord of the Rings, ...

Which is a world as real and fascinating as the one of the The Wizard of Oz and not terribly complex after all, kids stuff.

...and they're real within the imaginations of everyone involved in making those films. That's all that matters.

Really ! and what do you do with the imaginations of the guy who goes see those movies ? Not everybody with a brain goes to the movies to drool in front of fantasy ! Maybe some people are counting on the directors to show them something " different " a " better different " like a better way to look at life ! Instead we have to cope with the glorification of war, a battle is a battle, death becomes amusing, creatures dies in fun and funny ways. Frankly those movies were the most terrible movies I've seen. Remove all the special effects in these three movies and what's left ? You might as well watch an old John Ford movie and get the same results. In the Two Towers if you remove the fact that the Gollum is, for the first time, a realistic, amazing digital creature what is left ? Nothing, just boring wandering and the big eyes of Frodo. Same for the last one. If you remove all the amazing fantasy creatures from the battle there is nothing left. If you imagine that town being assaulted by romans instead of dreamy creatures the battle becomes boring. Basically we're captured by special effects, not substance.

Well, when I say we, i was not, thank God !

I respond:

Which is a world as real and fascinating as the one of the Wizard of Oz and not terribly complex after all, kids stuff.

Not terribly complex? Oh, dear. Is all fantasy merely "kids stuff" to you?

Really ! and what do you do with the imaginations of the guy who goes see those movies ? Not everybody with a brain goes to the movies to drool in front of fantasy !

Then why on earth would you go see any Lord of the Rings movie?

I suppose concepts of selfless love, friendship, sacrifice, and honor don't qualify as something "better"? Better than what? Against what are you measuring film if you see nothing high-minded in LOTR?

Instead we have to cope with the glorification of war,

In what way is war glorified in LOTR?

a battle is a battle, death becomes amusing, creatures dies in fun and funny ways.

Clearly, you saw a different version of LOTR than the rest of us have.

Frankly those movies were the most terrible movies I've seen. Remove all the special effects in these three movies and what's left ?

Love, honor, friendship, sacrifice...

You might as well watch an old John Ford movie and get the same results.

I'm not sure if that's true or not, but even if it were, no two films are allowed to cover similar themes?

In the Two Towers if you remove the fact that the Gollum is, for the first time, a realistic, amazing digital creature what is left ? Nothing, just boring wandering and the big eyes of Frodo. Same for the last one.

Right. Nothing. Nothing at all. Except a battle with evil, a parable of temptation and the corrupting nature of power, and the redemptive quality of love. Nothing at all.

Again, I ask, why did you subject yourself to not one but two of these films if you're so dead set again fantasy?

If you remove all the amazing fantasy creatures from the battle there is nothing left. If you imagine that town being assaulted by romans instead of dreamy creatures the battle becomes boring.

Dreamy? You see something "dreamy" in orcs and trolls and Nazgul?

Basically we're captured by special effects, not substance. Well, when I say we, i was not, thank God !

Thank God.

[he never responded]

01.07.04

to batch #1 | to batch #3