|Caminante Nocturno |
The Hunger Games is just Battle Royale for sissies.
That's what old people would usually say about cool things.
Battle Royale might have been interesting if they had bothered to follow through with even a single plot point. I mean, how much time did they waste explaining danger zones and then you never even saw what that meant, much less any effect it had.
A good commercial film reviewer tells the film's intended audience what they need to know in order to decide whether or not to see it
My favourite "Phil Rosenthal" "review" is still the first one, reviewing THE WIZARD OF OZ from a "men's rights advocate" perspective. Also, that "review" of THE BUTLER where he just points out how every aspect of the film is IMPORTANT.
"Peter Rosenthal", not "Phil Rosenthal", sorry.
The "Butler" review is exactly how I felt when I watched that movie, and it only got worse after I looked it up later & found out it's pretty much all made up. Not that it's a bad movie, but still.
Onion reviews really got their head stuck up their ass shortly after they moved to New York.
I've grown really weary of the annual "what's hip, kidz?" Young Adult Trilogy/Heptology of films.
Especially since Lemony Snicket only got a single movie and he's infinitely more interesting, just generally.
I hear there was a magical time before the 80s when sequels and character franchises were fairly rare.
|Innocent Bystander |
It wasn't genius until he got out the notebook.
|Mr. Purple Cat Esq. |
I was wondering how he can read that material without cracking up.
My theory was that he would have to read it over and over and over again, grinding through it relentlessly with grim determination until it is not even mildly amusing. Then he can do the sketch.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|