Waiting for good reviews is not really a terrible strategy in general. It sure beats the "see a movie every critic has shit on" strategy.
Waiting for good reviews is not really a terrible strategy in general. It sure beats the "see a movie every critic has shit on" strategy.
They're both in Urban Dictionary, so take your pick.
I think Pitt has limitations as an actor, but I agree that he does a great job picking roles. Contra @Scrawler2:disqus , I think he does his best work as a mimbo. The hair-frosted, treadmill-rocking dunce he plays in Burn After Reading is pure gold.
I don't know enough about TV economics to know how much this matters, but I don't subscribe to HBO, and I've rented/bought all the episodes of Girls available on Amazon, which means I've spent $20 on the show. I have to imagine that that makes me pretty valuable as a customer, even as compared to an actual cable…
I don't really follow, to be honest. Seinfeld isn't the seminal portrait of anything at all, and the lifestyle portrayed on the show is not only hard to identify with, it's fairly despicable (as the meta-commentary in the final episode tried to point out).
I have mixed feelings about this. One the one hand, a lack of perspective is just a fundamental part of lived human experience. The characters on Deadwood lack perspective on what it's like to be suffragette living in New York City. The characters in Downton Abbey lack perspective on the plight of Chinese subsistence…
I didn't read the article because I'm just getting into season 2 and am generally trying to avoid spoilers, but anyway: I can't really fathom the anger directed at this show. It's great. Most stuff on television sucks, and this show is one of the few things that doesn't. What the hell?
But measuring the gap isn't enough. As @avclub-5e5e0bd5ad7c2ca72b0c5ff8b6debbba:disqus notes, plenty of quality actors have taken shit roles. Lots of shit roles, even. Hasn't Christopher Walken been in about 3,000 movies, some of which weren't timeless classics?
Wilco concerts are fun.
Dammit, why do you have to bring real life into this? I'm sure Po Bronson is a thoroughly delightful person in real life. Can't I just nurse my petty grievances in peace?
Apparently AV Club comments on posts about fake news shows are where I get my news now.
Yes, but his previous book was about parenting, and I guaran-goddamn-tee* he came up with the idea after becoming a father. Writing about the dot-com boom and then transitioning to yuppie parenting manuals is cock-punchable squared.
This sounds kind of interesting, but on the other hand, Po Bronson seems pretty cock-punchable. For me, everything he does carries the vague stench of late-'90s Wired magazine.
Agree. And while there is much to savor, I think "pork loins" really put it over the top for me.
I think both Charlie and Adam are meant to be conventionally attractive. They might not be male models, but they meet the bar for sitcom good-looking. Adam might actually be hot — I'm not a great judge of these things.
I'm rooting for Quvenzhané Wallis, obviously, because the only possible pleasure I could derive from the Oscars is the knowledge that a six-year-old from Houma, Louisiana can take home the honors.
Well, I guess we can consider this entire interview refuted. Nonetheless, I still hope Aziz ends up doing his TED talk on dick photos.
I was optimistic until I saw this trailer, although Pixar does have a history of making better movies than trailers.
The real monster in this movie is date rape.
That, or unconscionable laziness. He at least could have Photoshopped Jigsaw in there, for old time's sake.