Letters to the Editor

• Mega-response Part 1

  [Read the article: Art movies: R.I.P.]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  (1) The early presidential races are tiresome, sure. But what do you want? Everybody to shut up? This is a great time for national debate and the campaigning spurs it on.

  (2) I saw the Edwards/Coulter exchange and Coulter's "counterpunch" was anemic at best. Hardly "high-testosterone." You are far too easily impressed, Camille. We know you like Coulter and other wannabe-iconoclast types. But what do you make of her lack of humanity? What's your take on that?

  (3) Ann Lewis made an issue of the Hillary cleavage thing because the article was stupid. When was the last time you saw a major newspaper focus on a male candidate's clothing so intently? The Washington Post is not supposed to be like the Washinton Times or the New York Post. Or is that what you would prefer?

  (4) At least we agree the Iraq war is FUBAR. I can't get behind you on your confident prediction that we'd be able to swoop in there "in a decade or two" for what would be a "real war" (how is that defined nowadays) waged mainly by air. You shouldn't play military strategist unless you have half a clue what you're talking about.

  (5) How do you want the Dems to approach geopolitics? What should they do differently -- say the exact same things as Republicans? Your prime example is that "terrorism isn't going to go away." Which Democrat implied otherwise? HOW do we need to "recalibrate our global strategy"? I mean, it sounds good on paper, but...

  (6) How should the U.S. "more intelligently address" jihadism? By doing what? Come on, either substantiate your statements with something concrete or stop playing expert.

  (7) You describe the generation of the 1960s as narcissistic. Does this mean you think the 1950s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s are not narcissistic? Really? Wasn't your '60s generation also idealistic?

  (8) You ask rhetorically of your fellow art-film fans, "What have we achieved?" What do you mean? Were people supposed to have achieved something that they did not? How so? What is it that was promised but never delivered, Camille?

  (9) I fail to see how "The Godfather" stands out from all other films in the past 35 years. I saw it (1 and 2) recently; it's good. It's also pulpy and melodramatic. I agree, there have been few films with such a level of sublime, organic, intensely purposeful creativity since then. I blame it on excessive irony and self-reference in the 1990s. But did you not see Cronenberg's "A History of Violence," Camille? I could start listing many, many film titles. Few of them would have won Oscars or reached as mass an audience as "The Godfather," but neither did Bergman's films. Your statement seems to be an admission of failure to pay attention to contemporary film art over the years.

  Permalink Thursday, August 9, 2007 09:07 AM