This just in via e-mail, director Dan Ireland’s counterpoint to my Jolene review:

Subject: Lindy West’s review of JOLENE

To the editor: Dan Savage

TITTY TITTY BANG BANG

Re Lindy West’s vile hypocritical excuse for a review of my film Jolene… what can I do but laugh, and perhaps projectile vomit in her face at the same time. For you guys to keep such a lame brained single-minded, ill informed, frustrated moron employed says it all, anything for controversy, even at the cost of journalism. And we’re not even talking bad journalism here, but the word journalism itself. Sad state, but hey, what ever makes ’em read the papers, right, Dan? And she’s your film editor? In a city like Seattle? You’re selling your paper (and your audience) short.

More battle of the sexes (RAWR!) after the jump!

I was incredibly curious what The Stranger would say on this particular film, as I’m usually a pretty easy target for you guys in the first place. And then I found out that Ms. West was (sic) “reviewing” yet again another of my films. After her “the youth of today reject the saccharine Mrs Palfrey at The Claremont” review that I garnished on my last film, I could hardly wait to see what she’d do with this one.

So, at the end of the screening when our publicist asked Ms. West what she thought about the film, she replied, “I liked it for the most part”. Direct quote. There were even witnesses. Well, blow me over with a tear sheet from The Stranger. We were all kind of stunned that after her last ‘youthful’ attack on my manipulative sugar lacquered granny film (one of the more entertaining reviews of my career) that maybe Ms. West enjoyed the fact that my new cast was under 60.

So, we waited for the review to appear. And waited, and waited and waited. Then, finally, last night on the final evening of the films run in Seattle, Ms. West’s self proclaimed procrastination period of writing the actual review ended.

But a funny thing happened (aside from her endless blogging) on the way to her Mac Book Pro. She read some positive reviews by some male chauvinist pig reviewers (aren’t they all), like Rex Reed, Tom Keogh, Charles Taylor, Wade Majors, David Edelstein, Stephen Farber, Bill Arnold, Armond White – all members of The New York Film Critics Circle, or The National Society of Film Critics or The L.A. Film Critics, and suddenly decided to take a new tact – HATE the film, proclaim it’s vulgarity, center on its exploitation of women, but more than that, insinuate the only reason the other reviewers liked the film was that they were infatuated by “titties, titties, titties, titties, titties, and more titties”. Good angle, right? Let’s take on the other critics.

Well, if that was the case with the other critics, why bother when you can go on line and get more mojo by typing in on a web site that’ll show you more in ten seconds than my film does during it’s two hour running time. Hey, did Ms. West ever consider that one of these reviewers might be gay… but more to the point, maybe even the filmmaker might be gay, too. Imagine what she could do with that… titties, titties and more titties in a film by a gay director who was secretly using those titties to hide behind his latent subtext of really wanting to put… Willies, willies and more willies in the frame. Now there’s an angle you could really run with, Dan, and get a few more readers to respond. It makes about as much sense as Ms West’s issue.

Perhaps when the Blu Ray/DVD comes out in March 2011 (another fact Ms W got wrong) you can have another go at it. Why not? In fact, let’s burn every DVD we can get ahold of before we damage the tender moral fiber of “The Stranger’s” readers. Right.

In closing, I’m glad that Ms. West got to work out her angst/rage, and rouse her troops to common decency, and even get paid the 40 bucks she probably got paid for writing her blog disguised as a review. And even though it has absolutely nothing to do with my film, or E.L. Doctorow’s story, which she obviously never read, your vicious dismissal was beyond dishonest, exploitive, cowardly and lame. If there was an ounce of journalism in Ms. West’s body, it might have stuck with people, or me even. Perhaps as Ms. West suggested to potential future male customers, rent the DVD in the privacy of your own home, pull out your “Johnsons” and do your business. Perhaps Ms. West might well consider doing likewise, and while she’s down there, she might consider going one step further, having an overdue enema to remove the 37 piece luggage set that seem to have been stuck up there a mighty long time. She’s a little long in the tooth to be playing the angry young girl from The Stranger anymore.

And for the record, our film opened in New York, Los Angeles, Santa Fe and Seattle, and to date has only played one Landmark Theatre. So the insinuation that my film played because I have some kind of hold over Landmark in Seattle is yet another fabrication in Ms. West’s “review”, and I use that term loosely.

I never writer reviewers or editors about my films reviews, good or bad, but in this case, I’ll make an exception because considering the source, Ms. West doesn’t qualify as a reviewer.

She’s a self-proclaimed blogger, at best, (and a hateful, spiteful little one at that) with deep issues that almost every single one of her reviews addresses.

Your paper, your readers and Seattle deserve better.

Dan Ireland

I don’t have time to respond to all of Ireland’s many “points” here (there were “witnesses”? Curses!!!), so I’ll just let them stand. But it’s great to learn that gay men are categorically incapable of demeaning women. Except, apparently, in letters-to-the-editor.

Lindy West was born an unremarkable female baby in Seattle, Washington. The former Stranger writer covered movies, movie stars, exclamation points, lady stuff, large frightening fish, and much, much more....

81 replies on “Letter to the Editor: He Said/She Said!”

  3. Really, why get so upset about the negative review in one alternative weekly (a badly written, stupid, irrelevant-to-the-movie review, written by a bad, stupid, hateful, spiteful little writer with 37 pieces of luggage stuck up her ass), when you’ve had so many positive ones from well-known critics?

    A more dignified response (almost as dignified as no response at all) would have been to use the famous “I am sitting in the smallest room of my house. Your review is before me. In a moment it will be behind me” retort, attributed to various famous playwrights & composers.

  5. Maybe Lindy was just being nice to your publicist because she didn’t want you projectile vomitting in her face.

    If anything, Lindy’s review kinda made me want to see the movie a little more than I did before I read it. I said a little because you can’t really polish a turd and this movie sounds like quite the turd. Even then, I’m still not the slightest bit interested in seeing this movie and I am a HUGE fan of titties.

  7. It’s a shame that Ireland’s valid points (it was a terrible review, if you can call it that) are completely overshadowed by his personal, demeaning attacks.

  10. Wow! Lindy’s perspective and voice are always strongly identifiable in her reviews. I think that Mr. Ireland needs to stop reading her posts about his work as they clearly agree to disagree.
    I do take issue with his point that gay men don’t objectify women– or fixate on breasts. This is a sad, grasping-at-straws tantrum and Mr. Ireland should be ashamed. Grow up. Grow a pair. You are putting your work out their to be seen. Some people won’t like it. Some people won’t understand it. Get over it.

  13. I was going to see this film until I read this letter. Now I don’t want to support this asshole Dan Ireland in any way.

    But I nominate him for a new weekly column: ReBUTTing Lindy West with Dan Ireland.

  17. It’s incredible to me how often people accuse female reviewers of “having issues” when they are known to be critical of movies. I’ve never seen this with male reviewers. Hey asshole, maybe it’s a GOOD thing for someone (especially a FILM CRITIC) to be discerning about film and look a little deeper rather than just love all independent film unconditionally. That way when they actually LIKE a movie, you know it’s probably pretty fucking amazing. I’m sorry she didn’t like your movie but it sounds like a lot of people did so you’ve got that going for you.

  19. Come on. All women know all gay men are really just full of sunshine and rainbows and cuddly kitten-feelings and sugary euphemisms for female genitalia like canned ham and axe wounds.

    … wait …

    “You can’t exploit/objectify someone you’re not attracted to” is only a good argument if you expect to exploit or objectify someone you are attracted to.

  21. Sorry, D.I. but the only thing more offensive than the misogyny in Jolene was the mediocrity of your filmmaking skills. It was like you tried to remake Forrest Gump, but replaced Forrest with a sluty redhead. Jolene is nearly “Showgirls Bad” and the only reason to watch it is to laugh at it. I suggest watching this movie and taking a drink every time the ridiculous main character, Jolene, fucks some dude. This movie makes me angry just thinking about it…my hands are shaking.

  22. Dan or other slog editor, you left out a couple of sics. “Garnished” – pehaps he meant “garnered”? “Tact” – perhaps he meant “tack”?

  24. Note to Mr. Ireland: When Lindy West REALLY doesn’t like your movie, she says it looks like a bunch of gay men are playing with Barbies (see her review of Sex and the City 2).

    Count your blessings.

  25. My my, nice hissy fit, Mr. Ireland! I second commenter #17. Of course, Lindy is one of the main reasons I read the Stranger and Slog at all, she ALWAYS makes me laugh. And that is real talent.

  26. Funny, I was reading West’s review of the runaway train movie with Denzel Washington and was thinking that she is getting better all the time.

  28. @22: The (sic) was in Ireland’s original e-mail. Lindy didn’t add that, she just cut-and-pasted the letter as-is. I know this because he sent it to all of us.

  29. Lindy is our own Dorothy Parker. She’s that good. I forwarded this review (just as I did the Sex and the City 2 review) all over the country because it was so spot on. I think 17 is right—just because she’s a woman she owes it to you to like your film? Huh?

    Funny how I didn’t really remember the director’s name—now that he’s made an ass of himself I will never forget it…..

  30. uh, publicists SHOULDN’T be asking critics their opinion pre-review.

    If I had been Lindy, I would have smiled wanly and silently shuddered.

  31. Wow, butthurt much?

    Lindy is amusing sometimes, but I don’t hang on her every word. I sometimes even make up my own mind and disagree with her about a movie. Adults can be like that.

    But this letter is pitiful. This letter, more than Lindy’s review, makes me not want to see the movie. Mr, Ireland, if you want people to take you seriously, try growing up first.

  32. Dan Ireland’s ‘letter’ is a riot — thanks for running the whole of it, Lindy. It makes your point even better than you did.

  33. I’m not sure he should have written it, but that is one entertaining letter.

    And I don’t think Rex Reed, for one, was all excited about the titties.

  34. I don’t mean to be trolling this thread but…

    @30: It happens all the time, which is weird. I walk out of a movie and the first thing I walk into is a publicity person asking “What did you think?” I usually just kind of grunt or make an “umm” noise or something. Sometimes I lie. But it seems very weird to me that they ask that.

    They’re always very nice, otherwise, though.

  35. If there has ever been anyone more butthurt than this clown, I’d be surprised. He also didn’t actually raise a single cogent objection to the review.

  39. Poor Lindy. Sigh. I was just reviewing her review the way she reviewed my film. Now I’m feeling like I violated her like I violated poor Jolene. Poor sensitive soul, sorry Lind. That’s just the sugary part of me coming out, you know, the Mrs Palfrey side. Guess I exploit titties as much as I do Grannies. Go on, girl, tell it like it is! xo

  40. To Mr. Ireland, I wanted to say I am a 41 year old woman with a 17 year old son. I consider myself to be a “normal” woman who enjoys whatother normal women enjoy. And I saw Jolene.

    What a great, fabulous movie! I mean it. It was great!! It actually made me cry and kept me glued to the movie from the beginning. This Jolene character was not only stunning in her own skin, but each time she evolved she took you on a journey. Her natural sex appeal shined through and if my guess is rightm she will win something for this performance. I also think she is going to be ahuge star. I have never seen her before…new comer?

    Having said that I must also say that Lindy does not speak for all us women. Honestly she sounds like somebody who was asaulted by an older man when she was younger and she never got treatment for it. So it had been festering all this time and now she hates Jolene because maybe Lindy sees herself in that caracter?? Maybe the director of this movie is the one who asaulted her and that’s why she hates Jolene so much. I don’t know. But it does sound very personal to me. I agree that Lindy did not review the movie like a professional. She sounds very angry at the director and she might need some help. Becase what she described is absolutely not the movie that me, my mother, my sister, and my niece all watched together and thoroughly enjoyed. Lindy may not want to accept this but at some point in our lives, as women, we are all Jolene.

  41. @39: {I was just reviewing her review the way she reviewed my film.}

    You did a good job with the random boldface type, but you need to replace that cloying, self-pitying tone with some really crisp, illustrative metaphors if you really want to hit it out of the park. Also: MORE PARENTHESES!

    I do appreciate how meta it is that you’re COMMENTING on YOUR review of HER review of YOUR movie — that’s totally Lindy!! It’s too bad it all comes across as petty and vindictive instead of pointedly opinionated and entertaining, like a good Lindy West review is. I give you 2 out of 5 stars. YES I JUST REVIEWED YOUR REVIEW OF HER REVIEW! (It’s possible Douglas Hofstader just had an aneurysm.)

    Also, have you considered the possibility that maybe you’re just a little too long in the tooth for this kind of endeavor?

  43. I wouldn’t be surprised if @ 40 is either associated with or is actually the filmmaker. Yet another person accusing a woman of being a tortured victim of abuse because they didn’t like a movie. You don’t have to agree with a person’s opinion of a movie, but IT DOESN’T MEAN THAT THERE’S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THEM. I know movies make us feel shit and everything but in the end, it’s just a movie. Furthermore, not everyone is going to identify with every movie ever made. Even if they are “normal”. There’s a wide range of normal, lady.

  44. I love when people write out 1,000-word diatribes about how something does not bother them at all nuh uh not a bit because it’s stupid and nobody else cares either because it’s so so dumb. I’m convinced– this guy totally showed Lindy how completely unimportant she is as a “reviewer”!

    The trolling of her blog gives it that extra special touch. Well played, sir!

  45. hahahaha! What a baby! OMG a Stranger reviewer was blunt about my Indepedent movie? Um, way to miss the boat on turning the other cheek, Mr Ireland.

    Lindy, if you were a gay man, didn’t have a blocked colon, and weren’t that scant 14 months older than me your opinion might count. As is, you lack a theatrical bond with ginger boobs and the natural drive to shove your nose up any SIFF staff’s butthole. I too pity you.
    And how dare you have the gall to pay someone face service about their mediocre film infront of their friends, family, coworkers, and actors instead of being honest in the safety of your own home? Don’t you have the balls to tell a harelip baby it disgusts you to its parent’s faces? What kind of top notch free weekly paper film critic do you think you are? way to make a living off cuteness and boobs.

    !!!
    I will never wipe my butt with the Stranger again, no matter how bad I need toilet paper at the Cuff!

  46. Mr. Ireland @ 39, you need to read Roger Ebert more. Specifically you need to read his review of Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo. Yup, that’s right: the one that’s opens his compilation ‘Your Movie Sucks.’ The director of that movie went WAAAAY down the road you’re traveling, and it was not pretty.

    See, you don’t want to go there. And honey, you’re going there repeatedly. So turn off your computer, and get the people who love you to lock it so you don’t send any more emails without their permission.

  47. Hooooo boy!!!!

    Anyone who’s enjoying this little contretemps might enjoy going back to the original review and looking at the comments there again. Because our dear Mr. I weighs in at 25. Even better, 26, repeats 40 from this thread word for word.

    Up until now, I thought 40 was a joke (“…at some point in our lives, as women, we are all Jolene.” Really? Please!), but now I realize 40 and 26 are some sort of Ireland-bot.

    Mr. Ireland, sir! Please stop. You are only making yourself more ridiculous. And unfortunately, you are underscoring Lindy’s point. If your movie’s theme is that Jolene in some way reflects my psyche, then I truly am insulted and do feel demeaned. I couldn’t give a shit that the idea came from E.L. Doctorow, BTW.

    Since you have now truly pissed me off (insulting Lindy, and insulting women) I followed your advice and looked at some other reviews of your alleged movie. imdb calls it “truly awful.” Jeannette Catsoulis in the NY Times says
    “Jolene’s skin may smell like warm milk to Brad, but to the rest of us it has curdled long before she leaves his bed.” Variety calls it a “queasy spectacle.” The NY Post says “So bad it’s almost (but not quite) good, Dan Ireland’s Jolene is an unusually elaborate and excruciatingly long vanity production….”

    Guess what, Mr. I? Looks like Lindy was actually being kinder than some others. And I never would have bothered to surf around to look at all these reviews if not for your bizarre attack on an writer whose work I admire. So stop, OK?

    People who work on movies know that some are just turkeys. Yours sounds like it’s truly a turkey. I’m sorry.

  49. Upon further review and reflection I have decided to rescind my comment @7. Mr. Ireland has no valid points. I watched the trailer for “Jolene” and felt like I pretty much saw the whole movie–and it was terrible.

    I am usually a fan of West’s reviews yet I initially did not like this one at all. Upon watching the trailer I have a feeling her every word is warranted. I certainly like smart movies that have some titillation and sexiness, in which case some degree of objectification is inevitable (film is a visual form, after all) but my god–characters should have agency even if to give it up in the bedroom. It seems Ireland’s “protagonist” only exists to be looked and acted upon by others, which is just depressing no matter how sexy she looks.

    Anyway, keep it up Lindy!

  50. @39
    1) The accusation of your film being in Landmark because of connections was not made by Lindy, but by a commenter

    2) Lindy’s job includes blogging, as do the jobs of every other Stranger Author. You see, the Stranger has two blogs, and their writers write things for it. I’m not sure how you expected using the word blogger as an epithet would make your case anyhow convincing. It instead makes you seem childish and out of touch. Do you believe the staff of the Atlantic, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, USA Today, San Francisco Chronicle, New York Post, Chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun-Times, and the Boston Globe (to name a few) should be derided for their blogging? Welcome to the internet age, Mr. Ireland.

    3) Lindy said nothing about when the DVD comes out, so she couldn’t have gotten that information wrong.

    4) A film reviewer needn’t read the source material to comment on a film. The job of a film reviewer is to review the movie in and of itself, as a piece of art. To say, “You need to have read the book to understand the movie” is an indictment of any film. It seems that even you recognize the inadequacy of your work.

Comments are closed.