Dear Mick:I usually go toRotten Tomatoesto learn if a movie is any good. And I give more credence to what the critics say than the viewers. Is that a reliable way to evaluate movie quality?
Robert Wolfson, Tiburon
Dear Robert:Rotten Tomatoes is a great way to get a consensus of critical opinion in a matter of seconds. Of course, a consensus gives equal weight to wrong opinions and right opinions, so averaging doesn’t always work, especially with a widely misunderstood masterpiece like“Vox Lux,”which received 37% from the audience and was rated 62% on the Tomatometer.
Yet, the movie and TV review-aggregation site often works well enough.
密苏里州的替代方法是读了很多vie reviews. If you enjoy that sort of thing, you’ll get to the point where you’ll develop a sixth sense, where you can read one review and know if you’d like something, even if the critic hated it.
亲爱的拉塞尔先生:Why in this world would anyone care about John Lennon’s temporary breakup with Yoko Ono?You’ve wasted an entire page on a storythat barely merits a footnote to a footnote.
Michael Biehl, San Francisco
Dear Mr. Biehl:如果you identify what you’re referring to as the footnote in your analogy — and the footnotetothe footnote — I think you’ll realize that what you’re saying isn’t right.
We’re talking aboutJohn Lennonhere, one of the greatest songwriters of the 20th century, and what you’re calling a footnote is the 18-month period he spent separated from Yoko Ono. Lennon’s entire American career lasted only 17 years, minus the five years he spent in semi-retirement from mid-1975 to mid-1980. So those 18 months represent about 13% of Lennon’s entire productive life and 25% of his solo career. Is a sizable portion of a great artist’s creative life insignificant?
As for the footnote to the footnote, I assume you’re referring to his girlfriendMay Pang, who lived with him and is now the best informedlivingwitness to that whole time. Pang is telling the truth about a period that was mischaracterized and discounted for years. I don’t think that’s nothing, unless you believe that writing about the arts in general is inconsequential. That’s a case that could be made, but I wouldn’t make it. I doubt you would, either.
Dear Major Mick:What puts a comedy into the category of farce, and would you name a few films that fit into this particular genre?
Robert Freud Bastin, Petaluma
Dear Major Robert:In farce, the humor is broad and often callous. In a straight comedy, the characters usually know that they’re funny.
In farce, they never know they’re funny. In farce, we’re invited to look at people and events from the outside, as though they were absurd. There’s little sympathizing or identifying with characters. Rather, we’re invited to see them as part of a ridiculous spectacle, with the implication being that what we’re seeing has broader implications, that life is ridiculous or absurd.
A lot of people don’t like farce, either because they don’t like the essential heartlessness of it, or they’re confused by it. But it’s one of my favorite genres, and one of the two — along with opera — that best replicates the experience of how we respond to the world internally.
Basically, opera expresses how you feel when something happens to you, and farce expresses how you feel when something happens to a stranger. (For instance, if you fall through an open manhole, it’s a tragedy. But if someone else does, it’s slapstick.) Good examples of farce in film are “Duck Soup,” “The Producers,” “Little Murders,” “Sleeper,” “Love and Death,” the 1970s “Pink Panther” movies, “This is Spinal Tap,” “Ruthless People,” “Old School” and “Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping.”
Have a question? Ask Mick LaSalle at mlasalle@sfchronicle.com. Include your name and city for publication, and a phone number for verification. Letters may be edited for clarity and length.