GREGORY BATESON LIVES AND NO BABYSITTER = NO MOVIE - Wow...if you haven't checked the Feedback Forum lately, you're really missing out on something amazing. It seems that famed anthropologist, social scientist, and cyberneticist Gregory Bateson has stepped up to defend colleague Margaret Mead's dismissal of 'Punch-Drunk Love' (or, its star and marketing campaign, anyway), despite the fact that both have been dead for over 20 years. I'm truly honored. Anyway, the esteemed Mr. Bateson writes: "The core of Sandler's fans are 11-22 year olds, but that's not all of them. You don't have to be a fanatic to know who he is, and you're forgetting the critics have to watch all his movies, so they certainly are familiar with his reputation. And I consider myself a perfect example: I'm not a Sandler fan in the least, but the fact that he's in the movie gives it instant recognition. And I think the choice by Anderson...of Sandler is for that very reason." I don't dispute for a second that Anderson knew he would get some extra mileage in the press for casting Sandler -- and yes, possibly even sell a few more tickets at the box office. But Margaret's contention was that Anderson was motivated by greed, and by saying he agrees with her, Gregory is implying that he, too, feels Anderson's intentions were less than honorable in some way. I just don't buy it. Anderson is far too serious a filmmaker to waste his time casting someone in a lead role simply to sell more tickets. If Anderson really cared about being a hit at the box office, his three previous films would have been a lot less artistic, and a lot more "audience friendly" than they were. And if Anderson was going for box office gold, he certainly didn't do his math very well because 'Punch-Drunk' has only made $6 million in three weeks of release. Apparently, Sandler's legion of fans are, in fact, staying home. Stars, and fans allegiances to them, are a fickle thing. Just because Harrison Ford was in 'K-19: The Widowmaker' didn't keep it from being a gigantic flop. Sandler's previous hits all cleared $100 million at the box office; 'Little Nicky', meanwhile, made just $38 million. Why? Because even his die-hard fans could tell the movie was going to suck. Sandler alone wasn't enough to get them to go. Bottom line: 'Punch-Drunk's' final gross will be only slightly higher than it would have been without Sandler, and one could even argue that Sandler's presence will hurt its take. What about all of the serious movie snobs out there who have decided not to see the movie simply because Anderson would stoop so low as to cast Adam Sandler? There's got to be a few out there...

As for my review of 'Punch-Drunk,' well, a funny thing happened on the way to the multiplex that I think is worth sharing. Of course, I don't know how many of my readers have children, or really even like kids, but I'd love to hear your thoughts. Having an infant son, our first, means my wife and I don't get to movies nearly as often as we used to -- that, and, as I've written before, I saw movies for free in Iowa City. In Chicago, I have no connections and movies are really expensive. (This all party explains why I haven't been as diligent in my blogging over the past month.) Anyway, being new to our quaint little suburb means we have yet to procure a babysitter. As such, Holden gets to come to movies with us. Now let me explain something before I get too much further: I cannot stand any noise during a movie. And it's not just talking that bothers me -- chomping on popcorn, tapping your foot, any kind of repetetive noise drives me nuts. Fortunately, Holden usually just sleeps through the whole movie, and if he does start to get fussy, one of us immediately takes him into the lobby. So back to the story...We go to buy our tickets for 'Punch-Drunk' this weekend and the dragon lady at the counter informs me that "No children under six are allowed into Rated R movies." At first, I thought her/the theater's concern was about kids seeing "mature content," so I said, "Even with his parents? He's 7-months-old." No dice. Theater policy. Dejected, we walked away and it occurred to me that the real concern was about children being obnoxious and making too much noise during movies intended for and populated by adults. Considering my aversion to any kind of noise whatsoever, I certainly understand the policy. At the same time, my wife and I wouldn't bring our child to a movie if we didn't know that he wouldn't be a disruption. I've never had this problem come up at any other theater. Even the Chicago Film Fest allowed babies into movies. You're going to tell me the random crowd down at the multiplex is more serious about movies than the festival crowd? I'm still angry about it, but I'm curious what all of you think. Is it ridiculous for me to bring a 7-month-old to 'Punch-Drunk Love'? Needless to say, I'll be seeing it by myself tonight with a review for Wednesday. Review of 'Roger Dodger' tomorrow.

E-mail CinemaScoped@hotmail.com or start a discussion in the Feedback Forum