Less a review than a suggestion. I think that when I think about Bertolucci's approach to making a movie, from the eight films of his I've seen, a key word in my mind would be intuitive. This is not to imply that he approaches a movie helter-skelter; his films are beautifully put together (as a retired movie person, I know the demanding preproduction work this takes). But being fully prepared with a pre-visualized concept and being intuitive means that he takes his time with his stories. Since the movies of his I've seen, almost all that is, have multiple layers of storyline, they are not so easily accessible as the majority of films made. So my suggestion would be for your critics to see "The Sheltering Sky" a couple of times more. Virtually nothing in this film is there for cosmetics and as one sees it more than once the unifying forces of the story are revealed as a single and fully realized entity.

I am teaching a course on Bertolucci this quarter and I just showed *Sheltering Sky.* While surfing the net, I came across Chris Hicks's review and particularly the following assessment: "The Sheltering Sky" is the kind of "art" film that discriminating audiences either embrace or find incredibly boring and pretentious. And, in the end, that seems to pretty much sum up most of Bernardo Bertolucci's movies." Now I know why I warn my students rto stay away from movie reviewers when they engage in their research for their papers....

Really, now, I have to say this so-called review by Chris Hicks is so typical of the unintelligent banter that turns a blind eye to the brilliant movies out there. And there are many of them, including Bertolucci's. THE SHELTERING SKY is one of his best. Chris Hicks and Leonard Malton should have gotten a life and have been engineers instead. The two to not have real respect for filmmakers who think (and what is wrong with painting interesting and beatiful and disturbing pictures as he Bertolucci does? Plus it does too have a narrative! I do agree with the "idle rich" comment but that's up to us to start buying books and going to movies that are produced by and are about more real people. But in the context they were real. And The Malkovich character made his living off composing, the woman character off writing. It gives us a stupendous view of dying and sex and old age. Not to mention how desperate we become as to actually enjoy be pretty much force into marriage as the female character is to the man in the caravan. People should also check out LITTLE BUDDHA. My only reservation about Bertolucci, whom I consider one of the best, along with Hitchcock, von Trier, Polanski, Oliver Stone etc. is that he pushes buttons to move us, and maybe it's a male thing, but I don't like my buttons being pushed, and I prefer a more straightforward (ie. Hitchcock or von Trier) approach to moving me. THE SHELTERING SKY is, truly, one of my favourite films.