M*A*S*H*
To the Editor:
Recently, I had the chance to leaf through some back issues of COMMENTARY, and on the strength of exactly three of Richard Grenier’s pieces—particularly “Arms & the Movies” [October 1981], in which he discusses M*A*S*H—I strongly suspect that he is the best film critic alive. . . . In 1970, when I sat through M*A*S*H scowling at the laughter around me, I thought I was alone in failing to find Gould and Sutherland lovable. Now I’m delighted to discover that there is someone with similar views, someone who, in fact, has been able to clarify my own feelings about the film. . . .
Ted Klein
New York City
_____________
To the Editor:
It was both a surprise and a relief, after ten years, to come across a like-minded opinion of the film M*A*S*H. When I saw the film I experienced the same acute embarrassment Richard Grenier did at the sadistic malice on the screen posing as an anti-war comedy. I walked out of the film after about an hour or so. . . . [But] most, if not all, of the acquaintances with whom I discussed the film could not comprehend my objections to it. . . . Mr. Grenier has articulated my disgust and outrage far better than I could have done.
Mordecai Shelef
Birmingham, Michigan
_____________
To the Editor:
I was pleased to run across Richard Grenier’s acute and perceptive comments on the original M*A*S*H. All that he says about it . . . can be applied to the TV series spin-off—with interest! The “cute” sadism of the former has become the staple of the latter. For a long time I thought I was the only one around who noticed the dishonesty and phony iconoclasm of both the film and its TV successor. . . .
Sam Bluefarb
Desert Hot Springs, California
