So I'm off-topic, but the appropriate letters thread is closed. Just saw "Sweeney Todd." Thought it masterful. Thought it Shakespearean in its understanding and portrayal of human frailty. Thought Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham-Carter sang beautifully (no, they didn't Broadway-Belt anything, but who needs operatic lungs when you can act with your eyebrows in a close-up shot? The notes rang clear and true, and boy did they ever sing the subtext). And, Sweet Jesus, the design!

I think any person interested in theatre, its analysis or its criticism, should watch Burton's film along with the "Great Performances" tape of the original Broadway cast of the musical. Live theatre and film are quite defferent media, requiring different methods in handling the same story. But a single work can be deeply satisfying in either form.

So, what are your favorite films of 2007? This deaf reader wants to know!

Movies about dead rock stars, movies about living rock stars, musicals, a fake documentary and a movie about a dying speechless paralyzed guy.

Hmm sounds like everyone wants to make music videos not movies.

I haven't seen most of the films they mentioned... Well, come to think of it, any of the films they mentioned. I want to see "Diving Bell," the Joy Division pic, "Bamako," maybe the Bob Dylan thing (I like Todd Haynes' other stuff, like "Safe"), and I guess the Clash pic, and...

Anyway, what's with everybody being so agreeable? And why is the IFC intro guy even *IN* this video? He does nothing.....NOTHING! It's kind of weird how he's just this disembodied "welcome to the show" guy and then disappears.

Anyway, Zacharak and O'Hehir sitting there discussing films are so agreeable and smiley and happy about their favorite movies, it's the cutest thing since Rabbit Bites vs. The Fluffy Mewing Kittens.

When are you two going to do a Worst of the Year list and video? Come on, what movies did you either walk out of, or feel dirty afterwards for staying? Instead of Zacharek's endearing smile and O'Hehir's good-natured expressions, I want to see grimaces, nose-holding, and eye-narrowing smirks of disgust.

Also, you two should lay into each other. Instead of O'Hehir being diplomatic and saying, "I had more reservations than you did about the Dylan pic," he should be, all, "You liked that? What, are you nuts?" And Zacharek should be all, "I can't believe that Joe Strummer thing is one of your runners-up. That was a total piece of crap!"

Bring it, Salon.

I live in a small town in the Midwest. I can't comment on the quality of these movies. I think I will have the opportunity to see only a couple of the movies mentioned. Why can't critics choose something that has already been widely available to the general public and that the public actually went to see. All these critics' lists scream of elite snobbism. And I will also herald the call to get rid of Stephanie Zacharek.

Can't wait to see There Will Be Blood. Has anybody been yet?

I really wanted to read the review. I hate when websites have video only stories. Its a cheap and greedy and grab for ad revenue (video ads command higher prices than banner ads).

Good point by the deaf reader who wrote in - Salon is not ADA compliant?

The thin air up there on Mt. Nosebleed is draining oxygen from your sense of humor. 'Superbad' was hands down one of the top 5 films this year. But's it's not in Serbo-Croatian and has few if any lesbian midgets who want to cure world hunger from a Peruvian mountaintop plus it was written AS a movie which seems to be strike one around here.

There seem to be a great number of total knobs frequenting Salon. Was Santa's gift this year a stick up your ass? You guys are both ill-spirited and idiotic. Seriously, who dropped you on your collective heads?

Examples:

defcahn1: "...never have I read a reviewer who consistently demonstrates such a complete misunderstanding of the fundamentals of good cinema as Zacharek."

Disagreeing on specific reviews is one thing. I disagree with many of her reviews, for various reasons. But mocking her entire understanding of cinema is another thing entirely. She at least justifies her likes and dislikes. What about your own? Which reviews of hers did you disagree with, and why? If you have such a firm grasp of the fundamentals of good cinema, then how about sharing it with us? Let's hear what you think are the fundamentals of good cinema. Don't be vague, be specific. Which reviews did you disagree with and why, exactly, did you find them lacking? Either put up or shut up. Calling for somebody to be fired because you disagree with her tastes is pathetic. Personally I think she has her good reviews and her somewhat-off reviews, but she's a solid writer overall. I read a lot of movie reviewers -- everybody from Peter Rainer to Roger Ebert to Manohla Dargis to Terrence Rafferty to Libby Gelman-Waxner -- and believe me, she's a long, long way from the ones who really suck.

anonymous: "I live in a small town in the Midwest. I can't comment on the quality of these movies. I think I will have the opportunity to see only a couple of the movies mentioned."

Anonymous dude, my condolences on living in a small town in the Midwest where nobody has access to anything but "Transformers" and "Bee Movie." Are you in such a small town that you are outside the range of the postal service? Because there's this thing called Netflix where you can see all the films mentioned in these articles. I believe Blockbuster also has a mailed-movie service. There are also movie-rental establishments that, if they don't completely suck, would likely have at least a portion of the films mentioned.

more from anonymous: "Why can't critics choose something that has already been widely available to the general public and that the public actually went to see. All these critics' lists scream of elite snobbism."

Because movie criticism is not an act of parroting back what the public likes. It's not a popularity contest. It's critics going out and finding gems and coming back and reporting them to people. The whole point is for the readers to find out about things they probably wouldn't have heard about otherwise. Also, if you read the related articles, Andrew O'Hehir's list was specifically packaged as his favorite indie movies. A good deal of Salon emphasis is on subculture and out-of-the-mainstream ideas. There are many, many publications and websites that deliver Top 10 lists based on more mainstream tastes: Entertainment Weekly, Time, Rolling Stone, your local newspaper, etc. Do you really want all publications to have the exact same emphasis? Do you want everything homogenized and catered to your midwestern sensibility? I mean, really?

october271986: "Good point by the deaf reader who wrote in - Salon is not ADA compliant?"

This whole "video is mean because deaf people can't hear it" thing is bullshit. I seriously doubt any of the people who have complained about this are actually deaf. I think they're trolls who are trying to zing a liberal website with a liberal-style complaint. Any reasonably intelligent deaf person would not raise a stink because Salon has videos. The majority of Salon's videos have clearly labeled corresponding text material. This video is accompanied by corresponding articles by both Zacharek and O'Hehir (I do with Salon would more prominently link to them in the tease to the video, though). Instead of complaining about Salon trying to be more multimedia savvy, perhaps you should complain to YouTube for their lack of material for the deaf, or complain to every radio station ever invented.

Nulla Sallus: "The thin air up there on Mt. Nosebleed is draining oxygen from your sense of humor. 'Superbad' was hands down one of the top 5 films this year."

Sorry, but "Superbad" was among the most overrated movies of the year. Many of the scenes -- like the cops who destroy their own car -- just weren't that funny. The two female love interests were way out of those guys' leagues and I didn't believe any of what happened for a second. The two guys' friendship was sorta touching but the main character (the overweight guy) was too big of a prick to care about enough to make the drama work. "Juno" (which has one of the same actors) was a far better movie in every respect: funnier, more effectively dramatic, more believable, more grounded in a complex reality, etc. If you really thought "Superbad" was so great then I question your taste and also think you probably didn't get out to the movies much.

"But's it's not in Serbo-Croatian and has few if any lesbian midgets who want to cure world hunger from a Peruvian mountaintop plus it was written AS a movie which seems to be strike one around here."

This is completely illogical. Even watching the video you get the sense that these two are not snobs. Their choices are certainly not in the usual genres, but the movies are fairly direct. The "Diving Bell" movie, for example, is about a man's sensory and emotional experience after being paralyzed. Paralysis is a reasonably common affliction -- it's not some "out there" crazy avant-garde subject matter. The only reason you think the movie choices is snobbish is because you are too lazy to seek them out for 5 seconds in order to try to understand them.