Thanks. Though I had originally planned two pieces about Munich. the reason I hadn't posted a review for Munich is that there had already been a couple of newswire items about it on CIMC and a ton of mainstream and liberal/progressive/radical commentary on the supposed politics of the film (same reason I didn't post one for Brokeback Mountain). Since there's interest I'll write one today or tomorrow to post on Friday. Also, two of the films are not shite at all. One is nothing short of a classic and the other is a solid horror film. The class and gender politics of TSWMH would likely be of interest and enjoyment to those who visit this site. There are several more films from Mikio Naruse that will be playing at the Siskel in the next few weeks. Anything by him is worth checking out.

The reason the MOAG review was posted was to compare it to Naruse's film. I wasn't expecting it to be great but Marshall's last film, Chicago, was at least entertaining. Another reason for posting reviews of mainstream films that might not be any damn good or of interest to our regular readership is to help draw more readers to CIMC's site. Stop for a snack, stay for dinner. There are links posted on IMDB for these reviews. In some cases it might not draw many viewers. King Kong for example has over 237 reviews linked to. BloodRayne has significantly less at 37 and we might get some more hits because of that. For some films CIMC has the only posted review.

Another reason, and easily the weakest one, for posting reviews to bad films as well as good films is that I enjoy it. I'm very petty I suppose but it's a lot of fun to trash bad movies. I'll try to make a point to review more good films. The pickings have been rather slim this month though.

pax, JJ