I haven’t seen The Ruins, but why would you not mention that it’s based on a Scott Smith novel? Maybe some people would be interested in that information. And what kind of film reviewer thinks Jonathan Tucker and Jena Malone are unrecognizable actors? I’m sure no one in your readers’ 18-30 year-old age bracket has seen Donnie Darko or the Texas Chainsaw remake, never mind any of their other work. Oh, and maybe the film totally ignores or changes this, but the people living near the temple don’t routinely feed American college students to the plant. They tried to keep them away from it and once they went there, they have to keep them from leaving so it doesn’t spread throughout the jungle. The movie probably does suck—perhaps even a lot—but if your film reviewer can’t find a way to tell the reader that without making lame jokes and stretching the truth or just plain making things up then why not have someone else do it because the lame jokes aren’t making me laugh. 

–Andy Barton

Dear Andy,

I was too busy doing my impression of a Swiss army knife last week when I handled Do It, Watch It and Media Mix to read the novel, but I’m aware of it. With my workload, my outside reading list is restricted to British men’s magazines, videogame manuals and matchbook covers. Does a bad movie suck less because it’s based on a novel? And would anyone mob Tucker and Malone on a crowded street or a dirt road? I think not. Thanks for reading the lame jokes. 

–Korey Hughes

Andy - Basically you’re agreeing with Korey that the movie sucks but picking on him for how he describes that it sucks AND you’ve never even seen the movie yourself? DUDE! You’re an idiot.