I have a major bone to pick about your film review of W.
by Oliver Stone [Film Listings
, Oct. 17]. I agree it's a 2½-star film, no quarrel there. But in the review, writer Josh Rosenblatt expresses that it fails to be an artistic masterpiece and says we've already seen the second half on the "news” and says, in effect: So, hmmmf, why bother seeing it? I say: Josh – pull your head out. You sorely underestimate the social import of this film! Who cares if it doesn't ascend to your bar of an artistic masterpiece! Don't you guys see that there is so much more
at stake right now and so much more to films than artistic achievement? Sure, Stone is decidedly "partisan" and unflattering in his portrayal of the Bush administration. But if you think everyone in America already
got to see this perspective on the evening news, you are out to lunch! Film is one of the very few mediums free to offer "counterspun" looks into politicians' lives. It has never been more
important for we the people to take all our leaders off the pedestals and to stop giving them the unquestioned and unlimited power we have been apathetically handing over. This film is about snapping us out of the delusion that just because someone wears a nice suit and is on TV that this means they can be trusted. We so
need this kind of shaking in America. I don't think Rosenblatt was paid off by neocons to deride the film. I think he was either trying too hard to be "fair and balanced" or taking himself too seriously as a lofty "critic of the arts" for all the South by Southwest folks that he falls into snooty shortsighted failure to see the potential social impact of the film. I applaud Stone for speaking his truth and his views through film, and I think everyone should see W.