Responding to a critic’s choices

Any film critic’s Academy Award best picture ballot [“A Critic’s Dream Oscars Ballot,” Jan. 20], does not include “Roma,” “Green Book,” “Leave No Trace,” “Vice” and “A Quiet Place” is simply not credible. Justin Chang seems to prefer languid, grim, self-indulgent fare like “The Rider,” “If Beale Street Could Talk,” “First Reformed,” and “Hereditary.” Of course, critics must march to their own drummer, and more power to them. However, we, the moviegoing public, rely on them to guide us to good entertainment. Those choices are akin to watching paint drying on a house and, mark my words, will largely walk away with minimal award recognition. Richard R. McCurdy Burbank

In his Oscar “dream ballot,” film critic Justin Chang wryly requested that readers not barrage him with emails challenging his choices. That witty comment made me smile until I realized there was no easy way for that to happen. The Times writers no longer include their email addresses in their bylines. If readers wish to correspond with a writer, they have to go digging for their email address.

Maybe I’m missing something here, but given that most daily newspapers are struggling to maintain circulation, wouldn’t offering readers the opportunity to engage in feedback be an inducement to subscribe? David Macaray Rowland Heights Editor’s note: Contact information for Los Angeles Times staff writers and critics (including Justin Chang) are listed on their bio pages and with most online stories.