Truly the Best Picture?

I have never seen such nonsense as that in this flap about Miramax’s “Shakespeare in Love” winning and DreamWorks’ “Saving Private Ryan” not winning best picture (“ ‘Shakespeare’ Hit by Snipers,” by Amy Wallace, March 23).

The notion that a budget for advertising tipped the scales in a professional community (despite the fact that the professional community advertising by DreamWorks was greater than that spent by Miramax) is absurd. Steven Spielberg made a fine film that was amply rewarded. Both the tough Weinstein brothers and the charming Mr. Spielberg deserve our accolades for doing what they do best: associate with good movies.

RICHARD P. McDONOUGH

Irvine

*

Studio executives, instead of lamenting the money spent on the marketing of “Shakespeare,” should focus on the real reason this film was such a success: It was charming, romantic and witty, and opened the door to a Shakespeare that could be understood and loved by contemporary audiences.

ED BALKAN

Los Angeles

*

I thought the Oscar went to the best picture of the year, so I was confident “Saving Private Ryan” would win. The professionals (cinematographers, sound engineers, directors) knew that, too. But when you throw the voting open to the whole “academy,” you wind up with people who probably think Omaha Beach is a theme park in Nebraska.

They should just call it the Awards Show. When you see the word “academy,” you think there are smart people involved.

ROCK JOHNSON

Palm Springs