The NY Times film reviewer answers readers' questions all this week.
About this Entry
The entry ‘Questions for A.O. Scott’ has 4 comments. It was published at 3:23 PM on December 17, 2003.
It was placed in the Quick Post category.
Recent Entries
-
Birthday Wish Hierarchy
In this modern age, we have a ton of ways to wish people a happy…
-
Doc Brown is the Villain
Gene Newman explains to us all why Doc is the evil mastermind of Back to…
-
Coffee Grounds and a Balloon Can Do a Lot
Cornell Computational Synthesis Laboratory built a universal robotic gripper out of a balloon, coffee grounds,…
-
Kindle to Support Lending
This will be a differentiator between eBook services down the road. Movies are a social…
-
Amazon's Approach to Product Development
A Quora user wonders and the head of Amazon’s gifting business answers. It shouldn’t be…
01/28/04 1:13 PM
What are some of the paths to becoming a successful film critic?
02/13/04 5:18 PM
Dear Mr. Scott: I am one of the founders of the Kansas Silent Film Festival held in Topeka, KS each February. Our 8th annual event is February 27-28. It is a day and a half event in which 12 silent movies are shown, all to LIVE accompaniment (organ and small orchestra). A film historian introduces each film and the silent era in general. Last year's event drew up to 800 persons at a time from 14 states. The event is FREE and open to the public, and is funded by contributions from organizations and individuals. Please consult our website: www.kssilentfilmfest.org for complete information. This is an unusual event to be held in a town in the midwest (Topeka's population is 120,000!) Would you be able to do any publicity on this event for us? Please let me know if you have questions or need further information. Thank you. Jim Rhodes, Topeka, KS. Phone: (785) 266-6807 or e-mail: jimsilent@hotmail.com
02/15/04 9:07 PM
Mr. Scott,
In your recent article in the Times on acting you say,"21 Grams, for instance, has struck me more and more on each viewing as a thoroughly preposterous story without a single credible character, and yet the acting is so thoroughly convincing that this objection almost seems trivial". I've seen this film three times so far, and I don't understand what you found preposterous about the story, and not credible about the characters. The more I think about this film, the richer it gets for me. I'd appreciate if you would specify your criticism. Thanks,Steve. Skrieck@aol.com
02/26/04 11:02 PM
Mr. Scott
I just read your obviously biased review of "The Passion of the Christ". You completely contridict yourself time and time again in the article. You see, I have read your review of "Kill Bill vol. 1" and your review of "Pulp Fiction". Your statements of disgust with the obsession of violence that Mr. Tarentino has are at best minimal. How do you lable your self a non-contridicting/non-biased reporter when obviously it seeps out of you faster then the blood leaving Jesus during his scourging in "Passion". You would have never been this critical of "Schindlers List" or "Saving Private Ryan" this I am sure. If you would be so kind, what is your true reason for your hatred of this film, and Mr. Gibson? And if you could please refrain from falling back on your lame-ass "Its far too violent" excuse, cause from what I have read violence is not an issue with you.
Sincerely,
Kris Kimlin