9 comments:

• posted at 2:11 pm on Mon, May 3, 2010.

  Posts:

  Many years ago my wife enjoyed Jason's columns while the rest of the family found them quite irritating. Now she has returned from the dark side and we don't even bother to look at them anymore. I don't understand why the New Sentinel even carries him. The only reason we can imagine is he must write the columns for free. I certainly hope you aren't wasting money paying for them. Here's the real problem: First, most people look at the newspaper on the weekend to see a review on the latest movies for that weekend. Jason doesn't get advance screenings so his column is always at least a week behind. Second, most would like to read about the movies that are appealing to the broadest group of our community. Jason refuses to review these films. Instead he writes crazy columns with obscure video picks of his favorites. Frankly his columns should be in some college newspaper rather than in the Sentinel. We love the paper for it's local coverage, but every weekend Jason's columns make me wonder why I subscribe. One day I'll probably just cancel.

  • Link

   

• posted at 11:33 am on Mon, May 3, 2010.

  Posts:

  J.B. gets a cheap shot on talk radio "hate pundits" as he calls them. You mean the people who report what is actually going on, don't you, instead of the dinosaur major media who are in the hip pocket of Obamaland. Get real.

  • Link

   

• posted at 10:25 am on Mon, May 3, 2010.

  Posts:

  It sounds like Mr Wallis is a poster boy for what happens when you accept violence and low morals as part of the everyday. Just like poison, you become sensitized to it and over time it takes more and more to get to you. Look at the sickness of the Saw movies, all they are are one movie after another on how horribly can we kill someone.People have a right to watch what they want and enjoy what they enjoy, but the more we celebrate the kind of violence that Hollywood throws-up every year the farther they are going to push it.In the end it is just like Wal-mart, if you like it go, if you don't, don't and hopefully your voting $$ will influence some of what comes out.

  • Link

   

• posted at 10:01 am on Mon, May 3, 2010.

  Posts:

  jbhiker,I rarely agree with you,but I'm with you 100% on your second post.

  • Link

   

• posted at 7:50 am on Mon, May 3, 2010.

  Posts:

  bobp, you had me pretty much in agreement with your take on this matter up to the point where you suggested that those who might decide to cancel their subscription to the News-Sentinel as being tantamount to starving people. I suppose you're referring to the employees of the newspaper that might lose their jobs if the circulation were to decrease significantly.As Sanacore's letter was addressed to the "Editor," who better to discuss his angst with than the very one who might be in a position to suggest to Wallis that he stick with reviewing movies rather than hurling his inappropriate insults and other non-editorial comments.I would think the powers that be at the News-Sentinel would be very interested to know what it might take to affect circulation and by extension advertising dollars and the survival of the newspaper, especially in such trying economic times.

  • Link

   

• posted at 6:36 am on Mon, May 3, 2010.

  Posts:

  Well Bob... let's stick to the point and Mr. Sanacore's is well stated. First off, the movie is "Rated R for strong brutal violence throughout, pervasive language, sexual content, nudity and some drug use - some involving children." However, Mr Wallis revels in the genius of the movie then goes on to attack Roger Ebert viciously. Examples such as "then frankly you disgust me (yes, I'm talking to you, too, Roger Ebert)." and "I hope all that righteous indignation works out for you, because in a misguided defense of flimsy social ethics, you're missing out on some of the most visceral, consistently engaging action that cinema has ever seen." That sounds really perverted to me. I would not hire someone who ever said this to me. Further, this is not a movie review as much as it is a personal attack on someone who feels as I do; that violent movies are generally bad - and Kick Ass is no exception.

  • Link

   

• posted at 5:08 am on Mon, May 3, 2010.

  Posts:

  Had to chuckle after reading Mr. Sanacore’s polemic about Jason Wallis’ un-pacifist taste in movies. Does he also perhaps read the restaurant reviews to find guidance and perspective about the meaning or significance of eating?While I don’t share Wallis’ tastes all of the time, he is always up front about his personal preferences, thus providing a reliable point of reference for evaluating his opinions. Mr. Wallis is also a young man, with all of the advantages and disadvantages that implies. After all, who can come to any real progress for themselves on the important questions of human existence without first having wholeheartedly tasted and even believed in the lessons of this world?Finally, Sanacore’s own credentials as an advocate on non-violence are belied by his threat to cancel his subscription. Really now, would he like those who don’t share his views to starve?

  • Link

   

• posted at 4:29 am on Mon, May 3, 2010.

  Posts:

  It's even more insidious than that, jbhiker. It's a matter of desensitization. The young people are being exposed to blood, gore and mayhem at younger and younger ages. They become used to it and it doesn't upset, outrage or in any way discomfort them. That is a pretty scary commentary on our society today; especially when blood and gore are used as a substitute for an actual story line. So many films these days lack any type of story line at all; or else they're poorly made re-makes of old TV shows.....blecchhh!!

  • Link

   

• posted at 2:09 am on Mon, May 3, 2010.

  Posts:

  Bravo Ben! Unfortunately we live in the age of no restraint when it comes to social interaction and led by the hate pundits on the radio and television, young people are seeing the dollar signs.

  • Link