Hampton Branch Library
Wants To Comment on Savlov Review He Doesn't Like
RECEIVED Sun., Aug. 14, 2011
Dear Editor,
My message is twofold:
1) Am I missing something, or did you remove the ability to comment on film reviews? May I ask why this ability was removed? I don't want to assume it was an issue with reviewer ego vs. free exchange of ideas.
2) Marc Savlov's review of Rise of Planet of the Apes [Film Listings, Aug. 12]: First, does anyone else have an issue with a reviewer telling the story of the movie? It really is possible to review a movie without telling us what is going to happen. Second: I'm really sad Savlov gave this movie two stars. His opinions about this movie seem to be all tied up in comparison with the first version. Why can't it be OK that this is a completely different movie and judge it on its own merits? I consider myself a film snob, and while yes, I found a few spots in this movie to be "cheesy," overall, it felt like a masterpiece. Countless times I realized my jaw was hanging open in awe, and all of those times it was because I was looking at – or into the eyes of – the central character, a creature mostly computer generated. Is Savlov's issue deeper than misplaced defensive loyalty to the first version of this film, and/or is he expressing subconscious fear of change?
My message is twofold:
1) Am I missing something, or did you remove the ability to comment on film reviews? May I ask why this ability was removed? I don't want to assume it was an issue with reviewer ego vs. free exchange of ideas.
2) Marc Savlov's review of Rise of Planet of the Apes [Film Listings, Aug. 12]: First, does anyone else have an issue with a reviewer telling the story of the movie? It really is possible to review a movie without telling us what is going to happen. Second: I'm really sad Savlov gave this movie two stars. His opinions about this movie seem to be all tied up in comparison with the first version. Why can't it be OK that this is a completely different movie and judge it on its own merits? I consider myself a film snob, and while yes, I found a few spots in this movie to be "cheesy," overall, it felt like a masterpiece. Countless times I realized my jaw was hanging open in awe, and all of those times it was because I was looking at – or into the eyes of – the central character, a creature mostly computer generated. Is Savlov's issue deeper than misplaced defensive loyalty to the first version of this film, and/or is he expressing subconscious fear of change?
Scott Swain
[Editor's note: The problem with reader comments that Mr. Swain refers to has been fixed. It was solely a technical issue. The Chronicle apologizes for the inconvenience.]