Here's a smattering of comments I've received over the past few years, some of it positive, some of it damning, and some of it plain old out there. If you have some irritant you'd like to get off your chest, a question you'd like to pose, or a mistake you'd like to bring to my attention (like the fact that I transposed the names of the characters played by Dylan McDermott and Fred Dalton Thompson in the rec.arts.movie.reviews version of  In the Line of Fire), feel free to drop me a line at dnb@dca.net.

All original typos retained for maximum impact, of course...

Pride & Prejudice (2005)  Pride & Prejudice (2005)  Pride & Prejudice (2005)  Pride & Prejudice (2005)  Constantine  Valentín  King Kong (2005)  Star Wars: Epsiode III - Revenge of the Sith  Grizzly Man  28 Days Later...  Dawn of the Dead (2004)  Japanese Story  Hocus Pocus  Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone  Cold Mountain  Hero (2002)  The Hours  The Hours  Kill Bill: Vol. 2  Dawn of the Dead (2004) The Passion of the Christ  Dawn of the Dead (2004)  The Passion of the Christ  Taking Sides  Lost in Translation  Mulholland Dr.  Charlotte Sometimes  Punch-Drunk Love 28 Days Later... About a Boy  Igby Goes Down  Punch-Drunk Love  Northfork  The Hours  Naqoyqatsi  Full Frontal  The Perfect Storm  An Everlasting Piece  The Girl Next Door  Butterfly  Croupier  Mission: Impossible 2  Topsy-Turvy  Message in a Bottle  The Straight Story  Twin Falls Idaho  Eyes Wide Shut  Bowfinger  The Blair Witch Project  Arlington Road  The Mummy (1999)  Billy's Hollywood Screen Kiss  Psycho (1998)  Simon Birch  The Rugrats Movie  Saving Private Ryan  The Pillow Book  Wag the Dog  Year of the Horse  Alien Resurrection  The Fifth Element  Matador  Twist

Re: "Dawn of the Dead" (2004)
Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:39:02 -0700
From: autowreckers@telus.net

Re: "Japanese Story" (1993)
Mon, 5 Sep 2005 09:13:05 -0700
From: Valarie A <crtt_36@yahoo.com>

Re: "Hocus Pocus" (1993)
Tue, 9 Aug 2005 23:29:11 -0600
From: wconklin5@hvc.rr.com

Re: "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" (2001)
Fri, 22 Jul 2005 12:21:18 -0600
From: h_ricks@softhome.net

Re: "Cold Mountain" (2003)
Sun, 22 Feb 2004 14:30:19
From: "Steph" <http://paris.typepad.com/ohlalaparis/2004/02/cold_mountain.html>

Re: "Hero" (2002)
Tue, 7 Sep 2004 21:41:09
From: "Dandelion" <dandelion@austin.rr.com>

Re: "The Hours" (2002)
Mon, April 26, 2004
From:

I would like to comment that David Butterworth does not seem to have understaood the movie The Hours, which is very saddening. (this fact being much more depressing than the Butterworth found the movie!)

There is a strong underlying message on sexuality, gender stereotyping and makes us ponder on life and death and its meaning. (these points have been unfortunately overlooked by the critique.)

I hope that in his future reviews he would be able to look at the deeper meaning of a movie or book or any form of text for that matter and not be quick to rush into conclusions. 

Re: "The Hours" (2002)
Fri, July 9, 2004
From: Mia

Totally dumb critique by butterworth....

Re: "Kill Bill: Vol. 2" (2004)
Sun, April 25, 2004
From: Brittany

This review is the most piss poor review I have ever read on Kill Bill 2. What the reviewer forgot to talk about is all the action in the first vol. A whole lot of stuff happened in the first film that was never really explained and it left the viewer with much anticipation and confusion for the next vol. The importance of vol.2 is most of the action happened in the first film but every thing else had to be explained in the latter chapter. And yes it takes dialogue in order to explain things, and Quentin does a superb job. I will admit some parts seemed to drag on but it was necissary in order to fully explain the full story of twists and turns. It reminds me a lot of Quentin's earlier film Jackie Brown and if your a fan of that fill you will love Kill Bill Vol.2.

Re: "Dawn of the Dead" (2004)
Sat, 27 Mar 2004 03:58:17 -0800 (PST)
From: steve miller <rebuiltearth@yahoo.com>

Comparing Dawn of the Dead to 28 Days Later is a laughable mistake at best. The only similarity was the adrenaline pumped movement of the bad guys. Am I the only one to notice that 28 Days Later had absolutely no zombies in it? All it had were people infected with a virus running around causing havok until they died from the infliction that they had. Unless I completely misunderstood the definition of the term zombie by thinking that they were the "living dead" then by all means I apologize, but otherwise, try not to compare apples to oranges again.

[Since 28 Days Later... was a complete rip-off of Romero's original Dawn of the Dead, the compasion seemed apt to me–db]

Re: "The Passion of the Christ" (2004)
Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:08:07 -0800
From: "Nene Dawson" <nene@2fast.net>

All I can think of is you must be a disciple of Satan. I cannot stand violence in movies. I saw Cold Mountain and many times I have to cover my eyes during those slaying scenes. But when I went to see The Passion, I surprised myself, I watched through the whole movie without taking my eyes off the screen. It's violent, yes, but it is violence that is meaningful. Not the Hollywood kind of violence. I want to tell you I went to see the movie twice, two weekends in a row. And I intend to see it again before its run is over. I'll pray for you that you'll not be choked by the clutches of Satan.

[Interesting middle section, but I don't understand your opening and closing sentences in the context of my review–db]

Re: "Dawn of the Dead" (2004)
Wed, 24 Mar 2004 01:37:47 -0800
From: "Tonya Wallace" <wingedaries@msn.com>

Hey moron what did you expect the movie to do grow wings and fly around as your personal slave,...idiot! for a Zombie horror movie it gave exactly what it could, if you don't like horror movies then don't review them go back to your sissy gay dancing movies and leave this to the pros,....idiot

[If you have any sissy gay dancing movies going spare I'd be happy to review them–db]

Re: "The Passion of the Christ" (2004)
Sat, 20 Mar 2004 22:36:41 -0500 (EST)
From: WINDYSMILEJULIA@webtv.net (Julia H)

Excuse me, but could you have done better? I am a film critic myself, and I think that ULTIMATELY a good movie should make a statement. I truly think that Mel Gibson was simply trying to do this, and in the finallity, this is what he did. NO, it was not "Hollywoodish", that's for sure. Yes, he used the "slow mo" w/ these beautiful camera people, and this was so the viewer could get a real jest of everything..... and by the way.....what about the music? The soundscore alone is phenominal.....

Anyway, I'm Julia & not trying to be a creep, I'm just really honest.......

[Yes, I probably COULD have done better, Julia. But that week my editor only gave me space for 275 words so I had to write an abbreviated review–db]

Re: "Taking Sides" (2001)
Thu, 1 Mar 2004 09:18:17 -0500
From: "Long, Barry" <BLong@aol.com>

It's Furtwängler, not Furtländer.

[I know.  Sorry.  I copied his last name straight from the IMDb (cuz it included the handy dandy umlaut) but they realized THEIR mistake after the fact and changed it.  I didn't catch it–db]

Re: "Lost in Translation" (2003)
Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:47:41 -0500
From: "Wenner, Adam" <AWenner@chadbourne.com>

Your dead-on review perfectly captures every detail and emotion of this wonderful film.  Having traveled alone in Asia myself, I found the metaphore of Tokyo and its inhabitants (prior to the party) as lonely and aliented as the charactersto be agonizingly perfect.  How about the kids playing video games and jamming on a guitar, not relating to other people but only to technology.    Keep up the great reviews.

Re: "Mulholland Dr." (2001)
Mon, 10 Feb 2003 18:30:08 -0500
From: "Joan Iaconetti" <iaconetti@usa.net>

Re: "Charlotte Sometimes" (2002)
Wed, 5 Nov 2003 00:32:41
From: "eric" <eric@charlottesometimesthemovie.com>

Re: "Punch-Drunk Love" (2002)
Sun, 2 Nov 2003 03:30:06
From: Danbridge13@aol.com

Writers and directors surprise and challenge us? Oh please sir do your job! That movie was crap and you should know it. What a waste of time. We go to the movies to be entertained, not bored and insulted. You should have said that the movie was crap.

Dan

Re: "28 Days Later..." (2002)
Wed, 10 Sep 2003 04:00:59
From: FREDDYTHELOX@aol.com

Why such a bad review?
did you do the homework for this movie.......... Godspeed you black
emperor!!!!!!!!!!!!
the music.........
The war!!!!!!!!
that's what makes this movie...

always
Brad Wilder

Re: "About a Boy" (2002)
Saturday, May 31 2002
From: Steve G.

I have to disagree with David Butterworth on the score. I think the mood of Badly Drawn Boy's music sits perfectly well with the film. Songs such as 'Silent Sigh' and 'Something to Talk' about really provide the film with extra character. Although I'll admit that having the music provided by a single artist is a bit of a downer if you don't happen to like them.

Re: "Igby Goes Down" (2002)
Sunday, May 4 2003
From: BUB

Since when is a film a football match!? I don't need somebody to cheer for. Steeres lived this life, or one like it. He portrays this class of East Coast snobs perfectly. Yeah the movie isn't an upper but it ain't supposed to be.

Re: "Punch-Drunk Love" (2002)
Saturday, August 9 2003 11:30 pm
From: Clay Kadash <ckad1979@hotmail.com>

Dear Mr. Butterworth,

I was searching through RottenTomatoes.com for reviews on Paul Thomas Anderson's "Punch Drunk Love" and found yours.  I agree with a lot about what you said... and think this was an amazing film.  Though, one amazing aspect of this movie that I felt you left out in your review... is the symbolizism. It's so wonderful, unique, amazing and different... that it blew me away.

Anyway, I don't want to drag this out. It was terrific reading you opinions on the film, you have a good eye for great stuff.

Take Care.

Clay Kadash

[One of the most difficult things about reviewing a film you truly love is not giving too much away. I was aware of the symbolism, but wanted the reader/viewer to unearth it for themselves–db]

Re: "Northfork" (2003)
Thursday, 31 Jul 2003 16:34:08 -0700
From:  "Product Promotions, Inc." <prodprom@sbcglobal.net>

After getting a chance to stumble upon your reviews of movies I just got a a chance to look at and your reviews of them along with some past reviews...I have decided you must have studied under the New York Times idea of reporting... not being there for the actual situation and then deciding to give your opinion. In all 15 of your reviews that I got to peruse... none of them were on the mark about what the movies were about.

Blair Slavin
Los Angeles, CA

Re: "The Hours" (2002)
Sunday, 29 Jun 2003 01:30:18
From:  "Jessica Lenes" <bd8649@aol.com>

Dear Mr. Butterworth,

       I agree with your review of The Hours.  It was so depressing, I was tempted to jump out of my window at the end (only kidding!).  I would have liked to watched a biography of Virginia Wolff instead, including the Bloomsbury writers and artists of that era.  Although the acting in this movie was exceptional, some of the characters were so bland and affected, they were almost invisible.

       I need a good comedy after viewing this one!

             Regards,
                                           Jessica Lenes

[Thanks Jessica. I realize that "The Hours" received rave reviews by many critics, but I just couldn't connect. Maybe a biography of Woolf would have a few more uplifting moments!–db]

Re: "Naqoyqatsi" (2002)
Tuesday, 5 Nov 2002 07:31:02
From:  "Judy D."

Your reviews are so good I even want to see the bad ones. Thanks! Judy D.

[Why thanks Judy, although I wouldn't exactly call Noqoyqatsi a "bad"film...–db]

Re: "Full Frontal" (2002)
4 September 2002 10:10:12
From:  "rover"

Dear Mr. Butterworth:

I thought this movie was a work of genius! The filming techniques were interesting and it was refreshing to see a movie that didn't include car crashes, explosions or characters that appeal only to teen-agers who hang out at Burger King. Granted it wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea - you had to actually pay attention and think about what you were watching. Soderbergh doesn't serve up a movie like a bowl of "mind-mush" like most directors do now a days. You never even mentioned David Hyde Pierce and he was fabulous in the film. He gave a performance like I've never seen before and was the heart and soul of the film!

[I agree with you that David Hyde Piece did an excellent job in the film–db]

Re: "The Perfect Storm" (2000)
Monday, 14 August 2000 01:12:58
From:  "rich rotter" <rjrotter@hotmail.com>

Dear Mr. Butterworth:

In your review of the movie 'The Perfect Storm' you point out many of the inadequacies in this movie. With most, I agree. However, you demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the drama and tension that occurs when one is at sea. I have been there, you obviously have not. The ocean exudes overwhelming power, in both its peaceful majesty and its unimaginable fury. Despite the numerous flaws, 'The Perfect Storm' does a fine job recreating the emotions one feels when they match themselves against an indomitable sea.

rich rotter

[Thank you for writing, Rich. You are correct that I have not experienced the kinds of physical and emotional stresses faced by the crew of the Andrea Gail, but I found the film so painful to watch by the time the otherwise impressive special effects kicked in that I lost all sympathy for the cast, the crew (this includes the filmmakers themselves), and the story. Had the film not been so flawed by that point I suspect I would have appreciated the "peaceful majesty and unimaginable fury" of the ocean much more than I did–db]

Re: "The Perfect Storm" (2000)
Wednesday, 26 July 2000 16:35:19
From:  "dj bergen" <djbergen@hotmail.com>

if you're not even intelligent enough to see why the two fishermen are fighting in the perfect storm maybe you shouldn't be spouting off your moronic mouth.

[Ouch!–db]

Re: "An Everlasting Piece" (2000)
Sunday, 16 July 2000 21:13:46
From:  Marpessa <marpessa@earthlink.net>

> Dear David. The script for An Everlasting Piece was finished two
>years before the Big Tease. I grew up in Northern Ireland. My Father is a
>Barber and had a Hairpiece company in Northern Ireland. The Directors of
>both The Big Tease and the upcoming Blow Dry both wanted to direct An
>Everlasting Piece and each were passed on before accepting other similar
>material. I'm not boasting but if there was an "inspiration" for the
>film it was my father and not some film I've never seen. Barry McEvoy(Scr.
>and Actor) An Everlasting Piece.

[Hi Marpessa. For a film reviewer, this was very interesting information to me, but since I didn't review "The Big Tease" (or "An Everlasting Piece"),I suspect that you might have meant to send this note to someone else?  Oh wait...  I wrote a brief capsule on the 'Piece.  Sorry–db]

Re: "The Girl Next Door" (1999)
Thursday, 13 Jul 2000 11:02:46 -0700
From:  Hal Sadofsky <sadofsky@darkwing.uoregon.edu>

I hope it is not out of place to respond to your review. Thanks for doing it, by the way, especially as I'm not likely to see the movie!  I had one quibble (and again, you have to take it as a light quibble since I haven't seen the film). You write

> There is really only one sour note in the film (if explicit scenes
> of cosmetic surgery don't have you bolting for the exits). Fugate elects
> to include a sequence in a hotel room in which an enthusiastic Stacy tosses
> around wads of cash after a night with an adoring fan. There are names for
> people who accept money for sex, and coming as late in the film as it does,
> the scene compromises a lot of what has come before.

I've always been confused about this. Are you suggesting (or does the film suggest) that it is appropriate to accept money for sex as long as it is being filmed and distributed, but somehow less moral to simply accept money for sex?

I've never understood why our society accepts sexually explicit pornography at the same time as it forbids prostitution, at least not on moral grounds. Practically speaking, it might be easier to monitor pornography to make sure people weren't being grotesquely exploited than it would be to do the same for prostitution. Not that we seem interested in doing either of those.

    Hal Sadofsky

[Hal. Thanks for writing! You raise a very interesting point that, I'm afraid to admit, I hadn't really considered. But I will think about it some more and get back to you. Thanks for reading my review, and for airing your opinions - feedback is always good to get and very valuable to me...–db]

Re: "Butterfly" (2000)
Friday, 30 June 2000 01:40:56
From:  lsb1 <lsb1@panix.com>

I can't decide if the child hurled insults at his teacher because his mother said everybody would be watching them. Or if he (picking up the rocks) really got into the denouncing. I'd like to know your thoughts.

We thought the movie was wonderful.
Linda LSB1@panix.com

[I think the ending was supposed to be deliberately ambiguous, but my take on it is that Moncho initially started hurling insults to protect his family, but his heart clearly wasn't in it, as his insults changed to more familiar remembrances of his teacher, Don Gregorio...–db]

Re: "Croupier" (1998)
Friday, 30 June 2000 15:49:38
From:  "nicjeff2" nicjeff2@gateway.net

David, I just saw Croupier (everyone on the net had been raving about it for weeks), and, well, what happened? I was with the movie up to the final fifteen minutes and then the entire plot just shattered into a thousand pieces for me. How did Jani get back to South Africa (especially if the casino heist went bad). What was Jake/Jack's father's role in the whole thing? Why did the girlfriend have to die (plotwise--i.e. if it had something to do with the casino heist then why didn't Jack/Jake get his too)? What's up with the black woman who is a white witch? Help, Jeff

[You're right, Jeff.  You DO need help...–db]

Re: "Mission: Impossible 2" (2000)
Sunday, 11 June 2000 14:05:20
From:  "Kevin M. Leidecker" <kevin@leidecker.com>

You review really well!

I would just like to say how well you review to MI2 was put together! Do you do this professional or where did you learn to write so well? How soon after the movie do you write your review and do you take notes while there? Could you read mine www.leidecker.com/mi2.htm and let me know ways to make my ideas more concrete? Thanks Kevin Leidecker

[Well I'd be happy to, Kevin, but your site appears to be having teething troubles...–db]

Re: "Topsy-Turvy" (1999)
Sunday, 30 January 2000 17:46:51
From:  "Robert Deutsch" <rdeutsch@yorku.ca>

Hi David,

I saw Topsy-Turvy last night, and, as per my usual practice, I checked out the reviews on the Net afterwards. (I don't want to be influenced by reviews read before seeing the movie.) I read at least a dozen reviews, both published (Roger Ebert et al.) and Net-based, but yours is the only one I agree with. I found the movie very disappointing.

Bob

Re: "Message in a Bottle" (1999)
Saturday, 25 December 1999 16:20:58
From:  "wesent goerdat" <wesent@hotmail.com>

>>I've got a guestion, would you please anser it and mail it back, already
>>Thanks.
>>The guestoin is: Wich actor would you like to send a message and what wouls
>>the message be like?

[Easy.  The actor would be Paul Newman.  I would ask him how he came up with the name "Sock-a-rooni" for his line of pasta sauces–db]

Re: "The Straight Story" (1999)
Saturday, 20 November 1999 03:13:39
From: "David R. Smith" davidrsmith@voicenet.com

Hey dude.  It's Richard Farnsworth, not Robert Farnsworth.

David S.

[I wrote RICHARD Farnsworth, my paper printed RICHARD Farnsworth, my web page references RICHARD Farsworth, but for some reason some joker at the IMDb chose to retype ROBERT Farsnworth.  What can you do?–db]

Re: "Twin Falls Idaho" (1999)
Saturday, 4 September 1999 13:51:16
From: "David Mullen" davidm2@earthlink.net

Thanks for such kind words regarding my photography! Nicely written review, too.

I'm glad you enjoyed the film; it was a labor of love, so to speak

David Mullen

Re: "Eyes Wide Shut" (1999)
Friday, 3 September 1999 08:38:41
From: hepsut2@webtv.net (hepsut2)

David:

Just a quick thank you for your honest review on EWS. Amazing how many are conned by the hype and fall for it, regarding a film or other artistic endeavors.

What is even more amazing to me is how utterly brainwashed both "critics" and the public have become...to the point of almost being somewhat scary.

At times I am literally fearful of discussing or giving me opinion on various movies or TV shows, since I know I will be held as a social outcast!

Thanks for telling it like it is....and giving some or us who still have our logic and discerning abilities yet intact....hope...

Regards...  Jack

Re: "Bowfinger" (1999)
Sunday, 29 August 1999 19:32:12 -500 (CDT)
From: JDArthur@webtv.net (Me Leave)

I saw the movie and I think that it was great.

[Looks like another future critic in the making–db]

Re: "The Blair Witch Project" (1999)
Wednesday, 18 August 1999 14:12:47
From: leclercq@mail.med.upenn.edu

D'OH! ...I wish I had read your movie review of the "Blair Witch Project" before I had gone to see it on Sunday. Yawn and nausea is how I sum it up.

[D'OH! indeed–db]

Re: "Arlington Road" (1999)
Sunday, 11 July 1999 23:08:05
From: JoseMolina@aol.com

FYI --

I read in your review that "Arlington Road" was written and directed by Mark Pellington. It was written by Ehren Kruger, directed by Pellington. You might want to revise your review.

[Thanks Jose. A number of people have pointed this out to me (I don't know what I was thinking when I wrote that!). I can't change the USENET review I don't think, but I have made the change locally. Thanks for pointing it out!–db]

Re: "Arlington Road" (1999)
Friday, 9 July 1999, 21:01:12
From: Kale Whorton <kale@godamongdirectors.com>

Excellent review of Arlington Road, however, you made an error in saying that the film was written and directed by Mark Pellington.

In fact, the screenwriter in Ehren Kruger, the screenwriter behind the upcoming Reindeer Games, and is currently writer Scream 3.

Kale

[Geez, how did I miss THAT. I guess I wasn't thinking (I saw the film several months ago and was trying to write this "from memory," but that's hardly an excuse). Thank you for pointing out my mistake, Kale, and for your kind words–db]

Re: "The Mummy" (1999)
Saturday, 22 May 1999, 14:02:54
From: Montana Taylor (MontanaT@WebTV.net)

What did you expect Gone With The Wind. It's the mummy. It was a good movie. It does not fall short.

[Does too!–db]

Re: "Billy's Hollywood Screen Kiss" (1998)
Sunday, 27 December 1998, 13:06:40
From: David M. Story <storyda@mail.auburn.edu>

Hi, I enjoyed your review of Billy's Hollywood Screen Kiss so I went and rented it yesterday. I had mixed feelings. The music was great, and the trio of drag queens were really "scene stealers." I loved "Les" - wasn't that his name - "Freak, party of one," so said George.

Thanks.

David Story

[I gave it **1/2 myself–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Tuesday, 8 December 1998, 15:22:38
From: Judy Clark <JUDY_CLARK@webtv.net>

It most certainly does have Bernard Hemann's screeching violins! Did you write this before you saw it?

[Are you crazy!!? What kind of a twit would do a thing like that?–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Tuesday, 8 December 1998, 12:13:31
From: BARRYWERKS@aol.com

The Gus Van Sant version is a dud. However, it DOES contain Bernard Herrmann's screeching violins. George Thompson edited Hitch's original, not Saul Bass. Bass designed the credits and storyboarded the shower scene and some other visuals.

[I did say that Bass "arguably" edited the infamous shower sequence–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Tuesday, 7 December 1998, 09:08:19
From: MGembus@aol.com

Hello,

I enjoyed your lengthy review online with the various comments about the original, which I have never seen, except for Janet Leigh's and the scary face of Mrs. Bates (as she is spun around) on several movie-highlight shows.

I really liked the film, which I saw in St. Louis tonight!

[Yeah, that Janet Leigh is pretty scary looking–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Tuesday, 7 December 1998, 09:02:44
From: CYHan77HM@aol.com

What an idiot to write a review for a movie you haven't even seen. If you don't see it, you have no reason to complain what so ever.

[Hmm, good point–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Tuesday, 7 December 1998, 07:51:59
From: Manny Agah <UH011@toc.dot.shde.az.us>

The only powerful element of the new Psycho is Bennard Herrmann's original score. One thing this new Psycho has done is that it has made the original 1960 film an even a bigger classic.

[You won't get any argument from me–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Friday, 4 December 1998, 01:30:16
From: Jack Linos <j.linos@csuohio.edu>

hey copernicus,

in your PREVIEW of "psycho", you missed the ingredient with the most interesting POTENTIAL for going to see it, the cinematography of chris doyle. Let's face it, nobody else is gonna fill Hitch's shoes or any of those actors. (they were ALL in top form)

you DO know doyle's work, right? right..........

jl

[Nobody's ever called me copernicus before–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Friday, 4 December 1998, 08:25:09
From: Jeff Heyman <jph152@psu.edu>

First of all, I cannot believe you'd write a review before seeing the movie. How can you simply assume that the editing, violins, and photography are not up to snuff in the new version?? You make alot of statements about the movie which will probably prove to be wrong. I've been hearing a rumor that the movie is not shot-for-shot after the shower scene. Wouldn't you feel like an idiot it that was true? Incidentally, you talk about the new movie not having the same editor as the first movie. I've edited plenty of film in my time and it's a monkey's job, especially if you already have a film to base your work on.

All I'm saying is that you should probably see the movie before p)reviewing it. **1/2???? HOW IN THE HELL DO YOU KNOW???

[Funny, I don't feel like an idiot–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Friday, 4 December 1998, 05:49:20
From: Michael D. Shaw <mds1@roxan.com>

Nice preview.

Still - one wonders how it's possible to get financing for a copycat remake.

But wait. I've figured it out. There is a huge market for angry males who just want to see lesbian Anne get whacked ...

[I hadn't thought of that...–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Sunday, 29 November 1998, 18:59:13
From: Jamie Peck <jpeck1@gl.umbc.edu>

Thanks for the pseudo-review; keep up the good work.

[I'll try, Jamie-o–db]

Re: "Psycho" (1998)
Wednesday, 2 December 1998, 11:15:44
From: Nick Davis <ndavis@fas.harvard.edu>

I'm confused.... have you seen the _Psycho_ remake already, or are you just commenting on the fact of it being made at all and the whole problematic of reviewing a movie that has already been made (with only the minor changes that you mention in place.) If you have seen the movie, what did you think?

[Yeah, that's it–db]

Re: "Simon Birch" (1998)
Saturday, 7 November 1998, 13:42:28
From: Gxchampion@aol.com

Friend,

This is the most shortsighted, contrived, and completely banal piece of criticism that I've read in a long while. Normally I do not feel the need to particularly jarring criticism such as yours, but shit man, this is serious. I mean Mazzello as "nothing short of remarkable", Judd "positively beams", and Platt "warm and tender"??? Where do you get this stuff? Are these qualities of good acting... "Positively beams"???

Look man, not tryin' to offend, but your shit's way off the mark.

Fellow Friend.

[I'm sorry that you neither liked nor agreed with my review of "Simon Birch." Thank you for taking the time to read it anyway–db]

Re: "The Rugrats Movie" (1998)
Friday, 6 November 1998, 12:12:36
From: Patrick Fincham (glencoe@qc.ibm.com)

Hey there, nice review, but I do want to get into this whole news group thing.

[Well you've come to the right place!–db]

Re: "Saving Private Ryan" (1998)
Friday, 7 August 1998, 14:37:42
From: Robbin Herzig (robbin_herzig@merck.com)

That was an awesome review, I am going to be sure to go see that with my fiancée who almost went to war (Thank God) he was a paratrooper for 7 years, he surely would of been killed. My girlfriend works at upenn also in the medical research department. Her name is Colleen Jones. Small world, isn't it?

Thanks again, I enjoyed reading it.

[It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to paint it–Steven Wright]

Re: "The Pillow Book" (1995)
Thursday, 9 April 1998, 22:17:08
From: Sundeep Nayak (sundeep@uchicago.edu)

That was the most honest review of this film I have ever read. More power to your mouse!

[This is why we write movie reviews, I guess–db]

Re: "Wag the Dog" (1998)
Monday, 23 February 1998, 11:09:13
From: Scott Straub (straub@visuallink.com)

we read your review on "Wag the Dog" ..... just wondering if you could shed some light on the ending????? at the end, a boom (microphone) can

be seen clearly overhead for the last 5-10 minutes .......

what is the deal?

with that???

any help you can provide would be appreciated ......... thanks, scott

[I didn't see the boom mike you mention, but that doesn't mean it wasn't there! My (admittedly) vague understanding of this matter is that when films are projected, some portion of the top and bottom of the frame are blackened or masked (the technique is naturally called "masking," giving the film a 1.85:1 aspect ratio, the ratio between the frame's width vs. height), and the frame is then enlarged to fit the screen. The print you saw must not have been projected (i.e., masked) correctly, which is why you saw the boom–db]

Re: "Year of the Horse" (1998)
Wednesday, 18 February 1998, 00:11:40
From: David Mitchell (whatcaplet@hotmail.com)

I was interested to read your film review.

Please let me know if "The Year of the Horse" (Neil Young) is going to appear in Japan or Australia. Also, do you know how I can obtain a copy on video?

Thank you...

David Mitchell

[Don't know, and yes!–db]

Re: "Alien: Resurrection" (1997)
Wednesday, 26 November 1997, 20:39:44
From: threeadams@webtv.net (ANDRE ADAMS)

A DO NOT WANT TO SEE THIS MOVIE AT ALL , I HAVE ALL THE ALIEN

MOVIES.

,

God bless and Thank you.

[No Andre. Thank YOU!–db]

Re: "The Fifth Element" (1997)
Monday, 19 May 1997, 17:56:12
From: Massimo Mauro <Massimo.Mauro@consilium.eu.int>

Dear David,

I read your review of "The Fifth Element" on rec.arts.sf.reviews, and I wholeheartedly agree with you, after having seen the movie. Your review is balanced, objective, and complete.

Thank you. I look forward to reading more film reviews written by you.

[Wow! I guess "balanced, objective, and complete" is better than "shortsighted, contrived, and completely banal"–db]

Re: "Matador" (1989)
Friday, 31 January 1997, 16:53:36
From: Rosemary Bork <rbork@total.net>

I stumbled onto your review about the movie "Matador." I just watched the movie yesterday, whoa it was shocking.

Do you know where I can find a picture from this movie?

[Yes, and I'll fax you a copy of one I happen to have lying around if you like–db]

Re: "Twist" (1993)
Monday, 20 January 1997, 12:27:02
From: Melissa Mohr <artserv@ozemail.com.au>

Do you have any information or know where I can find information on the Watusi dance. I am trying to find the instructions to do the steps of the watusi dance.

I'd appreciate any assistance.

Kind regards,

Melissa Mohr

Where's La Boeuf?

© 1984-2006 David N. Butterworth
All Rights Reserved

Last modified: August 04, 2006