The Flaws in Defense of ‘Indecent Proposal’ Script

After reading Jones’ and Rick Pamplin’s Counterpunches, I have come to the conclusion that, for working writers, they have too much time on their hands. As do I, for that matter, but I happen to be an unemployed writer, so I have an excuse.

I disagree with Pamplin’s suggestion that movie critics would better serve their readers if they “address(ed) their hopes, fears and dreams”; that they should tailor their writing to the whims of the moviegoing public. As Jones would probably tell you, that is the job of the Hollywood screenwriter.

It’s absurd for Pamplin to deduce that critics “uniformly like pictures that audiences don’t” based on a comparison between lists of financially and critically successful films. (“Pack journalism”? What about “pack filmmaking”?) The best is not necessarily the most popular, and vice versa.

The fact is, by definition, “Indecent Proposal” has succeeded as great big Hollywood entertainment, but if you had wanted both financial and critical success, may I suggest this: Billionaire offers a young, impoverished couple $1 million to spend one night with the Mrs., who, upon disrobing, reveals herself to be a man.

MARCUS SHEN

Palos Verdes