To the Editor:
Your article on Friday about "Indepedence Day" ["'Independence Day' free from intelligence," The Dartmouth, June 5] wasn't so much a review of the film as it was a litany of insults. I would think most audience members did not agree with your reporter at all about the film. Your note that "violence and special effects CAN a good movie make," is puzzling (and frankly, disturbing).
No succesful action film (and no good film, for that matter) relies solely on special effects or gory violence. The saving grace of Independence Day was precisely the fact that it did not indulge in the gory details of the human carnage that must have resulted from the alien attack.
Rather, the film never let its remarkable effects overwhelm its characters -- leaving the movie human instead of cold and alien, as your reporter seems to prefer. And as for any 'ecological' message that your reporter may be afraid of, I think that if he had watched the film a little more closely, he might have noticed that the anti-smoking, obsessive-recycler, afraid to fly, 'computer nerd' (as your reporter calls him) turns in the end into a macho, cigar-smoking, alien killing hero.
The message is somewhat conservative: once Jeff Goldblum, who plays the computer specialist, became a 'real man,' he wouldn't need to concern himself with the ecological health of the earth. And while I agree that too much time was spent dealing with the interpersonal issues of the characters in the film, those moments should have been replaced with scenes explaining how the code for the alien craft was cracked, a la "The Hunt for Red October."
And your observations about Will Smith seem to indicate your reporter was watching another film. Smith showed he has real movie-star potential -- an impressive screen presence, good looks, a brash and winning personality. The audience I saw the film with was transfixed by him.
Maybe if your reporter had thought a little more about what made the film work, instead of every little pet-peeve of his, he could have produced a compelling negative review. As it stands, it's insulting to the reader, and embarrassing to the writer. I think the tone and insights of your reporter's article showed a woeful lack of familiarity both with film and with good graces.
