Critics are very strange these days. I used to know a reviewer; he panned a dozen films. One of the directors found out about it... beat him up so bad he ended up at a hospital on Guerrero Street.

Yeah. This isn’t a review, this is a James Franco hit-piece. Dude may have made 18 (!!!!!) shitty movies, but this one is supposed to be the exception. C’mon now. This is like the only negative review.

Nothing like the AV Club to joyously and continuously jack off in to their own mouths.

It sounds like the reviewer wanted this to be a serious piece about what drove such a strange man to make such a strange movie, as opposed to what the movie IS, which is essentially “a bunch of friends making fun of an inside joke for two hours” except we all are in on the joke.

I was about to correct you, since I’d recently read another negative review of this movie. In fact, the article I read had similar criticisms of the film, so I thought I’d jump in and tell you that maybe there’s something to that.

Did your boss tell you to write a negative review on purpose because av club has become irrelevant and you need some traffic? This is one of the most uninformed, agenda driven reviews I have ever seen and I’m not even a big Franco fan. The bias against him in this review is weird.

I feel like any time you see a critic describe something as a “vanity project” it does nothing but reveal their own biases. Is it because the person created commercial art even though it wasn’t a financial necessity? Is it because the artist put themselves somehow “too much” at the center of the piece, challenging…

*Stares at 96% Rotten Tomatoes score*

This is the first outright negative review I’ve seen for this movie, and it kind of reads as though the reviewer is just holding a grudge against James Franco. So ... I’m still gonna go see it.

Allowing a garbage human being to host during the middle of his presidential campaign is cool, but making fun of a fictional windshield repairman is a bridge too far.

Critics love twee, saccharine bullshit masquerading as indie grit.

“IT’S EPHEBOPHELIA!” -Creepiest people on the internet

There’s only more cgi in Mindhunter than I’d think if I hadn’t watched all of the other 5,000 videos The AV Club has posted about how there’s more cgi in Fincher’s movies than I’d think.

Damn, usually it’s just a letter missing or using the wrong homonym “they’re instead of their” but yeah, sure just throw this shit up onto the internet, don’t make it even that indepth of a story AND get spelling wrong.

Stephen King’s It, for example, [rpbab;u would’ve been that much scarier had Pennywise’s gaping maw

You really had to dig through that interview to find the one, salient point, huh?

Any dickhead who wonders why no one is naming names just yet, get Evan Rachel Wood’s quote tattooed on your fucking forehead so you don’t forget. Read it, take it in, remember it and stop fucking asking.

“not because I don’t plan on saying these people’s names eventually, but because to start that process is an…

It’s updated because all of those famous women in Hollywood call attention to all of the OTHER numbers of women who also experienced the same harassment, victimization, and assault but who weren’t “lucky” enough to have the benefits of professional success and who probably had professional set backs as a results,…

This is the same world where citizens of the US elected Donald Trump president.

Do you screen the people you let come to this thing? Because I’ve been a commenter here for years and couldn’t guarantee I wouldn’t be up for attempted murder if I met some of these people IRL.