Vanity Cases

Patrick Goldstein makes many interesting and valid points about so-called “vanity productions” of certain movie stars (“Vanity, Thy Name Is Disaster,” May 19), but why on Earth did he set the keynote by picking on Burt Lancaster and “The Swimmer”?

Unlike most of the other misbegotten projects Goldstein cites, “The Swimmer” did not originate as the star’s pet project. Unless I’m mistaken, at least one other major name, William Holden, had already turned down the lead in John Cheever’s problematic allegory before Lancaster was cast by producer Sam Spiegel. According to Kate Buford’s recent biography, “Burt Lancaster: An American Life,” Cheever and director Frank Perry initially thought Lancaster was miscast. Once he’d accepted the role, however, Lancaster labored mightily to make the picture work, as detailed in Buford’s book.

Goldstein is right to call this volume “immensely readable,” but he might have added that Buford herself writes very highly of “The Swimmer” as admittedly a box-office disappointment but nevertheless a film ahead of its time. How well it works today is a matter of individual taste, but “The Swimmer” is the product of some talented people--Spiegel, Frank and Eleanor Perry, Sydney Pollack and, yes, Lancaster--who went out of their way to craft a frankly offbeat film that had something to say.

Surely there would have been easier ways for these people to stroke their egos had that been the primary purpose of this dark study in the American Dream.

PRESTON NEAL JONES

Hollywood

*

Goldstein’s focus on “The Swimmer” was ludicrous. It happens to be one of the best films Lancaster ever made! Steve McQueen’s “An Enemy of the People”--an interesting film with an important message. Billy Crystal’s “Mr. Saturday Night”--quite enjoyable. I thought the whole point of becoming successful was that you no longer had to do any piece of crap that comes along, but that you could actually find something you were passionate about now and then.

Frankly, I would rather see a talented person’s vision, even though it doesn’t quite work, than the committee-mentality results of 30 no-talents bent on making a zillion dollars. I hadn’t planned on seeing “Battlefield Earth,” but since Goldstein ranks it among some of my favorite films, I’ll go today.

JUDITH DRAKE

Burbank

*

I’ve always liked “The Swimmer.” Even today it remains one of the more watchable films from that self-indulgent era, and it’s certainly a more satisfying experience than its uncredited remake, Michael Douglas’ “Falling Down,” which substituted Los Angeles freeways and ethnic neighborhoods for Westchester swimming pools.

JIM DAWSON

Hollywood

*

According to the ratio of studio release hits vs. flops, “Dances With Wolves” and “Unforgiven” more than make up for Goldstein’s list of vanity flops. Throw in “Braveheart” and “Reds” and, with discretion, it appears vanity projects are a good bet. Seventy-five million dollars for Travolta’s bomb, however, is not showing discretion.

FREDERICK CLEVELAND

Hollywood

*

Goldstein’s characterization of Barbra Streisand’s efforts for First Artists as “forgettable fluff” and “lackluster drama” is at once demeaning and unfair.

The article chastises her for the lightness of “The Main Event” (which was a considerable financial success) and at the same time diminishes the thoughtfulness and effort that went into “Up the Sandbox” because it didn’t make any money. I’m surprised Goldstein didn’t take time to disparage “Yentl,” another “pet project” of Streisand’s that had to contend with the slings and arrows of a hostile media.

Just remember, the combined budgets for all three of these supposed “vanity projects” were less than the budget of one “Battlefield Earth,” and they continue to bring great pleasure to the audience for which they were intended: her vast, loyal fan base.

DARREN GLAUDINI

Torrance