Mail from our readers
Mail from our readers
Congratulations on a very entertaining year-end issue (98-99, Dec. 27), I can’t imagine a better choice for best movie than The Silence of the Lambs, or a better choice for Entertainer of the Year than Jodie Foster. She gets my vote for entertainer of a lifetime. Keep up the good work.
New Britain, Conn.
I’ve been reading Entertainment Weekly since issue 1, and ”Best of 1991” was the best of them all. I was especially happy to see Juliette Lewis as one of the Rookies of the Year. She totally blew me away in Cape Fear.
Why, in God’s name, didn’t Thelma & Louise make the 10 best movies list?
I simply cannot believe your critics ranked Beauty and the Beast as the No. 1 movie for children, considering that its moral comes right out of the Marla Maples dating handbook: No matter how ugly a guy is, if he’s rich, lives in a castle, and gives you a library, marry him anyway.
I’m an ardent reader of Entertainment Weekly and await each issue with a good deal of anticipation. And your year-end issue was no exception. However, I was greatly disappointed when I noted that both Bryan Adams and Michael Bolton, two of this year’s most inspiring singers, were listed under your worst songs of the year. I couldn’t disagree with you more. I’m positive I’m not the only individual who feels this way. Please give credit where credit is due. And if you still don’t believe that you have made a terrible miscalculation, I implore you to conduct an independent survey by which I know I will be proven correct — that both were the best of 1991.
New York City
Thank you for not naming Garth Brooks (yuk!) as Entertainer of the Year. If you had, I would have canceled my subscription!
After reading your year-end issue, I am appalled at Gina Arnold’s and Marisa Fox’s reviews of Michael Bolton’s Time, Love and Tenderness and Mariah Carey’s Emotions, respectively. These are two of my favorite singer-songwriters, and they deserve more credit. Michael Bolton’s rendition of ”When a Man Loves a Woman” was wonderful and full of soul. Mariah Carey has a singing range that anyone would be jealous of. It appears that your reviewers only recognize heavy metal or rap, while true singers get put down. — Debra Gutis — Brooklyn
I loved the ”Best of 1991” issue, but I noticed a typo in the ”Best of Television” section. For No. 3, you printed thirtysomething, which of course should have been spelled C-H-E-E-R-S.
One of the most refreshing shows to come along this year is Quantum Leap. It’s thought-provoking and insightful, and it challenges viewers to rethink their most cherished prejudices. Yet in your review you dismiss it as ”pretentious” and ”self-righteous.” At least it’s not morally bankrupt like Roseanne, the show rated No. 1. I find Roseanne to be meanspirited, back-biting, arrogant, gossipy, and needlessly sarcastic. Sad to say, reviewer Ken Tucker is right — a great many Americans do live like this. Only it isn’t funny.
Moose droppings to Ken Tucker for his remarks about Northern Exposure. This show should be rated No. 2 (definitely not that twerpy Seinfeld). And no, the show’s most devout and rabid fan (namely me) does not feel the ”it” has been lost at all. In fact, the show just keeps getting better and better.
Virginia Beach, Va.
Your double issue was very enjoyable. The items on censorship were especially interesting. But wait a minute. What’s this? On page 60 there’s a picture of Carré Otis with her breasts exposed but covered with black bars. On page 37, there’s a black-and-white photo of Madonna wearing a sheer see-through blouse with her nipples clearly visible. You print an uncensored photo of Madonna, but you censor a photo of Carré Otis? Do I sense a hint of hypocrisy? Obviously, it’s not a demonstration of extraordinary courage. In an interview, Otis said of American attitudes towards nudity: ”People are really anal here. They don’t get it…Everything is so in the closet here. It’s sick and neurotic.” You confirmed what she said. For shame!