I share your disappointment, guys - while funny, this movie wasn't as good as it could have been...Stay for an extra scene early in the end credits. Then, while watching it, step back and think about what you and everyone around you is laughing at. I mean, come on, are our standards really that low for hilarious comedy these days?
Grade:
Writing - 7
Acting - 8
Production - 9
Emotional Impact - 8
Music - 5
Social Significance - 4
Total: 41/50= 82% = B-
Very cooi, babe.
ReplyDeleteSo it's your second review for the Star Tribune. They actually got your name right this time, too.
Wonderfully written critique as always, Danny.
*wild applause*
Thanks so much, Miranda, as always.
ReplyDeleteI threatened to walk if I wasn't properly credited this time.
Just kidding. I need to do much better with reducing my word count. What I submitted mostly resembles what was printed, but it looks like a bunch of sentence fragments now instead of the flowing, beautiful prose that comprises all of my reviews.
What's most shocking about this situation, beyond the fact that it's a reality, is that I'm considered a top critic on RT because of the Star Tribune name. It's me against Ebert - the duel of the century!
I LOVE this.
ReplyDelete"...but it looks like a bunch of sentence fragments now instead of the beautiful flowing prose that comprises all my reviews."
NOW IF ONLY YOU MEANT THAT, YOU SILLY. It really is true, ya know.
But you're still on RT. No matter what the reason.
That's something I haven't accomplished. YET.
So don't sell yourself short, Danny. Ever...
Ha, all in the eye of the beholder, I suppose. Let's just say I'm not expecting a Pulitzer anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteRT may be one thing (and it is a ridiculous thing that I never imagined, same for my IMDb listing), but your own success at CP and now Glamorous Excess may be the real golden ticket...
You vs. Ebert? PUNCH'EM IN THE JAW...oh wait...
ReplyDeleteThat's cold, Scott!
ReplyDeleteNaw, I'd never direct any competitive spirit toward Ebert. The guy is a living legend and I forfeit willingly.
Why are they cutting your words down? This is the internet! There are three inches of white space after your article ends, more then enought to give you those last 30 words or so. They must be paying you by the word.
ReplyDeleteRegardless, well done. Now that you're a burgeoning celeb, let's set up the podcast roundtable!
It wasn't actually sentences cut out at the end (I would have preferred that), but words removed throughout. That's an editor's job, of course. I can't complain and I need to learn to be more succinct anyway. I'm just not used to holding to an exact word count.
ReplyDeleteI think it's determined by space both in the paper and vita.mn, not actually on their website.
Call me when you get the eggcrates mounted!