- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - page 2 of 2
_______________UNDER THE COVERS: AND A LITTLE SCUMBAG SHALL LEAD THEM BY JAMES PONIEWOZIK (12/22/98)
	If they gave Pulitzers for single columns, James Poniewozik should get one for "And a little scumbag shall lead them." He wrote the hell -- and most of the hypocrisy -- out of 1998. -- Douglas Milburn Houston
_______________TURKEY SHOOT BY SALON'S CRITICS (12/24/98)
	I know that Salon needs to be a money-making venture for it to survive as a free Internet venue, but I had to laugh out loud when each item in your year-in-review "Worst Books of 1998" feature offered readers the option to "Buy It From barnesandnoble.com." What's the thinking here? This book is painfully bad, but why don't you spend your hard-earned money on this dreck and decide for yourself? -- Tim O'Shea
_______________THE DARK HOTEL: BYE, BYE, MR. CLAUS (12/24/98)
	On the occasion of the simultaneous conclusion of the three "Dark Hotel" stories last week, I'd just like to say the idea of running a continuing story, especially one that tries to use the comics medium in an interesting way, is a fine one. I like the other strips you run, but I think you deserve a certain amount of congratulations for coming up with an original concept. And the librettists and cartoonists involved deserve a round of drinks as well for doing something cool to extend the Ninth Art. Good work, folks. -- Matthew Broersma
_______________MET EXPECTATIONS BY CHARLES TAYLOR (12/24/98)
	I have to admit that allowing Charles Taylor to make his "10 best movies" column a political statement for Bill Clinton just about lost me, but I'm glad I finished reading it. It was the perfect illustration of why the movie-going public is learning to ignore movie critics and form their own opinions. "Babe in the City"? "The Mask of Zorro"? You've got to be kidding! Nobody liked "Babe," and if Banderas' awful grimacing and scenery chewing weren't bad enough, the fact that "Zorro" was trite (and full of one-dimensional characters) by itself would relegate it to the "catch it on video" list. It used to be an unwritten rule among critics that the more obscure and foreign a film, the more likely it would be to make the Top 10 list. Now it seems there are even fewer criteria than before. -- Chris Glen Charles Taylor must be absolutely insane. I tried in vain to find the spry insight behind his opening references to "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and Jay-Z. Upon reviewing his "10 best" list, I soon realized there wasn't much insight to be found in his article at all. Several of Taylor's selections are some of the most banal and derived pieces of commercial trash of '98. Even worse, he tries to pass these off as pseudo-intellectual aesthetic visions that we unfortunately "missed." "Great Expectations"? Puh-leez. Choosing to make Pip a sensitive Sun-belt artist proves this is a weak -- albeit stylized -- attempt to get pubescent girls up-to-date on their Dickens. Pretty pictures does not art make. "Mask of Zorro"? Taylor should be ashamed of himself for that one. -- Trevor T. Murray 1998 was a phenomenal year for film, and it's a shame that none of the best ones are included on Charles Taylor's Top 10 list. Did he bother to check out "Pi," "Slums of Beverly Hills," "The Impostors," "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas," "The Spanish Prisoner" or "Celebrity"? Half of the movies he selected aren't even worth renting. -- Jonathan Yevin
_______________CRITICAL MASS BY SALON'S CRITICS (12/24/98)
	I was very happy and pleasantly surprised that "The Glass Intact" made it onto somebody's list of faves for the year. I first caught Sarge earlier this year at a free show in Los Angeles, bought the album, and found it to be one of the best pop albums I've heard in some time. -- Leonard M. Cachola SALON | Jan. 6, 1999

R E C E N T L Y+| "FACE-TIME" BY ERIK TARLOFF REVIEWED BY SCOTT SUTHERLAND

Do you want to respond to a letter to the editor? Join the ongoing discussion in the Welcome area of Table Talk If you would like to submit a letter to the editor for publication, please e-mail us at letters@salonmagazine.com. Letters sent by fax or "snail mail" are less likely to be accepted. Do not send attachments. Please include your full name and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours, so we can confirm your identity. This information will not be used for any reason other than verification and will not appear on the site. Letters may be edited for clarity and conciseness. Brief letters are more likely to be published. Place the name of the article you are responding to in the subject heading of your e-mail. If you do not wish your letter to be published, please say so in the subject line. For more information on Salon's letters policy, click here.