A Playwright's Response
Thanks for your review of Dr Egg and the Man With No Ear [September 18]. I am... visiting from Sydney, Australia, for a week to see the early performances here.... Suffice to say we have considered the message very strongly in the development, and tried to depict a scientist who has a mixture of both altruistic motives and desires for fame, rather than the archetypal 'mad, bad' scientist. We... tried to focus on areas of risk and responsibility, while not condemning the human need to explore therapeutic or cosmetic applications for biotech.... We have discussed your point and are looking at reflecting more about the scientist's altruistic motives and positive discoveries, so thanks for your crit! There were also science/art commentators in Australia who made similar points.
See Fargher's letter in its entirety and reviewer Kerry Reid's response posted after the review at chicagoreader.com.
Don't Mess With Cuaron
Re: Cliff Doerksen's review of Babylon A.D., September 4; see online for the full exchange.
Put down the thesaurus already. What a load of crap this review was.... It has all the hallmarks of the recent film studies graduate style; professed hatred of critically acclaimed movies, a self-important concoction of poorly integrated imagery, verbosely overstuffed yet conceptually malnourished style, and the dropping of numerous names to convince the reader of the author's intellectual credentials.
That review was a mess, and weirdly enough it was also an unnecessary attack on Cuaron's film [Children of Men]. Cliff, you opened your review sounding like a scorned elitist film snob and I don't think I'll ever take your opinion seriously during your brief (I'm sure) stint at the Chicago Reader.
. . . It's certainly fine to call upon the parallels and it's perfectly interesting to claim that film is overrated (though Cliff is certainly in the minority there), but this review was a sour, mean-spirited diatribe that would elicit eye-rolls from even the most pretentious film students.
Michael Andrés Ordoñez
Michael, Max and skr: I want to make sure I understand you correctly. It's your position that anyone who claims not to admire Cuaron's Children of Men has to be lying for provocative effect. Is that right?
How I long for the old days, when I was the one desecrating the Reader's movie coverage.
J.R. Jones, it's an honor and privilege to replace you on the board above the dunking tank at the state fair.