In Reply to: 97% of the country's top critics reviewed it favorably... posted by sjb on August 8, 2007 at 18:13:55:
...a review by majority decision! Of a bunch of wannabe (not "top") major critics.
And by the way, that incredible-looking "97% favorable" designation masks the reality of an 8.2 out of 10 average, i.e. four stars out of five. Not bad, but not a grand slam either.
Myself, I go for what Anthony Lane, or Ty Burr, or Duncan Shepherd, or James Verniere, say, might say -- these guys' approaches to film are already well-known to me.
Finally, I did not write it was a *bad* movie, only that it did *very efficiently* what it set out to do, which wasn't much; and there were major lapses in the plotting.
clark
PS So what did *you* think of it?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- But the irony, you see, is that I get slammed for posting specific reviews by others, yet here we have... - clarkjohnsen 08:39:18 08/09/07 (4)
- I enjoyed it. Knew what to expect and it mostly delivered. - sjb 06:31:50 08/10/07 (2)
- "I enjoyed it." As did I, but more as a get-out-of-the-heat matinee. - clarkjohnsen 10:42:57 08/10/07 (1)
- RE: "I enjoyed it." As did I, but more as a get-out-of-the-heat matinee. - rico 09:36:08 08/13/07 (0)
- "But the irony, you see, is that I get slammed for posting specific reviews by others..." - Only when ... - Audiophilander 09:30:39 08/09/07 (0)