Film criticism is askew

Re “The right kind of Oscars,” Opinion, Feb. 16

I’m trying to understand the point of Andrew Klavan’s Op-Ed. Is it that Hollywood films should not shed light on nefarious doings of huge corporations? Or that Hollywood filmmakers, and all good citizens, should celebrate “dogged” political leaders who want to save the country by undertaking witch hunts to flush out those who dare to think differently? Or that films that compassionately depict realities Klavan finds unpleasant (like teenage pregnancy, or homosexuals daring to live lives that heterosexuals are born entitled to) should be ignored? We’ve already had his “different kind of Hollywood” -- its heyday was from the early 1900s through about 1968, and I don’t think he has to worry about it ever going completely extinct. (“Rambo” is currently playing.)

Lynn Eames

Los Angeles

--

Klavan has surely gone off the deep end. Everyone is entitled to be a critic, but his singling out a recent film for his scorn is bizarre. “Juno” was widely praised by his fellow conservatives for the titular character’s decision to have her baby rather than terminate her pregnancy. (The ease in which she finds the ideal adoptive mother for her child was contrived.) If conservatives cannot even agree what American values are, then it is little wonder why so few are competent filmmakers.

J. Richard Singleton

Los Angeles