Contrary to what KRS general manager Charles Pace has been saying for the past two Sundays, I did not make “false, unjustified and damaging remarks” about the condition of part of the print of Over Her Dead Body when I reviewed the film for The Sunday Times (March 16). As I wrote then, most of the last reel is extensively scratched: i.e., it’s scratched from left to right and from top too bottom.
When I saw it, I remarked to a colleague that Quentin Tarantino had spent millions in digital effects to make Death Proof occasionally look as if it had been through too many faulty projectors, but the distracting eyesore contained in Over Her Dead Body must have been done for ‘free’ through negligence. This colleague replied “Surely that’s rain.” But when the characters moved from the background to the foreground of this night scene, he added, “My God, you’re right!”
On the day I was banned from press shows, The Sunday Times editor Steve Mallia told me he met Charles and Alex Pace (then KRS Director) and told them that it was “unacceptable that you turn away one of my contributors.”
He added that they replied that “only a part of the last reel was damaged and Eric should have talked to us about it.” Whenever I wanted to see Alex Pace, his secretary would interrogate me (and I do mean interrogate), comment and say that she would tell him, only to give me a reply that was either evasive or which had little to do with what I had told her.
Charles Pace should have apologised to film critics for showing them a film in such bad condition and the price of admission for this film should have been considerably lowered because it’s damaged goods. I had every right, indeed I had an obligation, to point out the damage to my readers so that they would be in a proper position to decide for themselves whether they wanted to see the film in such a partially poor state or not.
My duty to my readers does not begin and end with whether a film is good, bad or indifferent. And as a film journalist, I’m at the service of my readers first and KRS second, though they benefit a lot from my coverage.
Again, contrary to what Pace wrote, KRS hasn’t given me the opportunity to correct a mistake and to apologise for it. They want me to lie and to apologise for something that I was thoughtful enough to make for my readers’ benefit. A false correction and apology would restore KRS’s image, even if it’s secretly made under threat.
But they should have thought about that when they saw the damaged print. As it is, they couldn’t have damaged the KRS image more if they had tried to so because now the public is aware that KRS stands for a bullying monopoly.
Pace also had the gall to claim that critics are not penalised for their comments. Then it’s an amazing coincidence that on the same week as my comment on the damaged print of this film, all four releases had been awful. I had given 10,000 BC two stars and one star each to Over Her Dead Body, Be Kind Rewind and Game Plan.
He also contradicted Saviour Balzan for saying that I was banned by KRS from reviewing films. If I’m still reviewing films it’s despite the full frontal attempt by KRS to shut me down. But even so, KRS has prevented me from reviewing all the week’s releases as I had done during most of my career.
That’s because it involves much more time to see a film in a private cinema than at KRS where films are shown without any trailers, advertisements or intermission. Also, they screen two films back to back with just a five-minute break in between.
You can’t see two consecutive films in private cinemas and I’m not allowed to make notes while watching the films as this involves the use of a tiny flashlight. Before, these notes formed the backbone of my reviews. KRS releases some films on Fridays making them impossible to review that week as my deadline is on Friday.
I didn’t see Over Her Dead Body alone but in a screening room full of film critics, members of the clergy and KRS guests but not one of them came forward to support me. Nor did they protest against KRS for its shameful disregard for the right of the press of freedom of speech, a right that’s guaranteed by the Constitution.
I thank and congratulate Ms Farrugia for her support, not only of my honesty and integrity, but of these rights and values without which democracy cannot exist. Her very letter, which had style and a good structure, scored a number of bull’s-eyes. These helped to compensate for the demoralising silence from my so-called colleagues and even the clergy who, of all people, should know better and practice what they preach.
Many ‘colleagues’ made it a point of telling me how sorry they were for the unfair way that KRS treated me but that’s as far as they dared go. Had they supported me openly, I’m sure they would have been victimised by KRS.
Instead of being grateful that it’s been allowed to do business as a monopoly for ages, KRS abuses its monopoly to repress the press through fear.

Eric German
Balzan