I'm not someone who normally writes to publications, but after reading some of the letters from Salon readers lashing out at Stephanie Zacharek about her review of this movie, I feel compelled to point out a few things:

1) A movie critic's printed review is simply one person's opinion, and since this is still (for now) the USA, she is free to publish whatever opinion she has, just as you are free to write a rebuttal. However, to then proceed to insult and belittle a critic suggests that somehow your opinion is more valid. If any of you disgruntled readers have proof of that, please publish it so we can all see it.

2) If you feel a critic "hates every movie," then it would make sense that you would stop reading what that critic wrote, yet many of you appear to have read Ms. Zacharek's review anyway. Why are you reading (and then complaining about) a critic whom you've already decided doesn't speak for you? Are you simply a malcontent?

3) And if you "usually agree" with Ms. Zacharek's opinions, and are upset that you disagree on this one, so what? For a critic to be valid, does her opinion need to match yours 100% of the time? That sounds a bit arrogrant...

4) Lastly, the most disturbing aspect of some of the letters written by other readers is that they verge on trying to "shout down" a voice they don't agree with. How very "right wing." Sean Hannity would be proud of you.

It would be better to leave your mind open to the tiniest chance that Ms. Zacharek might have a point, or at least that her interpretation of the movie causes you to notice things you otherwise would have missed. In my opinion, you're free to reject an idea only after giving it a chance to be true.

You're welcome to try to shout me down now too, if you've got nothing better to do.