My review last week of Public Enemies generated this comment from a reader.
"Good lord does anyone even proofread this crap before publication? 'Weaponry and automobiles were the difference.' The difference between what? Also, way to get a jab in at them terrorists in this movie review about a movie from the 1930's. I'm sure that wins you points w/ your age 50+ demographic, which I suspect is the only demographic who puts any weight into any of your reviews."
Normally negative jabs don't bother me. I've been on the receiving end for way too many years but in this case I made an exception. Here's what I posted back:
"Grow a sense of humor. I was being a smart $%@!. You can understand that one, right? Why weren't you also offended by my comment about today's bank robbers running the banks? Picking on bankers isn't offensive but slighting a terrorist is?"
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to the Tri-City Herald
In the review, I mentioned that today's bank robbers operate the banks.
I ended up issuing a challenge. And I issue the same one to you —especially if you disagree with me more than we agree.
I'll be we agree on more movies than we disagree on. This person never did take up the challenge. Will you?
Post a list of five films that you think are really good. I'll bet I like more of them than I don't like.
Are you up for the challenge?