ruthlesslyabsurd--disqus
Ruthlessly Absurd
ruthlesslyabsurd--disqus

At least I don't cause lung cancer, you death stick!

The Owl Creek Bridge ending was super cool the first time I encountered it, but I'm getting increasingly sick of it

The first part of your comment belies the second; I think the first third of the movie absolutely hurts Predator's ability to be a classic

If you look at 1990s movies reviews from the Washington Post, there are always at least two (usually Hal Hinson and Rita Kempley) and they often don't agree. It's just jarring for me often when I'm like "Wait a tic, didn't they dislike this movie?"

Yeah that is the problem with sites like the AV Club. Or the New York Times I guess. Lots of places. But in contrast to people like Ebert, who did all the reviews themselves. The review becomes officially the AV Club's stance on a film, even if the other 5 writers felt otherwise.

Remember when you guys gave this movie a deserved B-? What's with the steady parade of "Wow it's great" articles?

"Combine the deep personal identification with pop-cultural icons with equally deep political convictions, and you get unapologetically subjective decrees that something is either perfect, or it is trash."

Nice review of an interesting film

Yeah sorry I've acknowledged this twice now, but I focused on the end of the article with Will Smith saying "And more black people too!" rather than on Ms. Chastain's point, which was indeed about HOW women were portrayed rather than how many were portrayed. Before you comment, spend more time reading the entire

I see your point there. I guess I focused on the end of the article
when Will Smith is like "Also add more black people" when Chastain's
comment was actually about the type of characters represented, not the #
of a certain type. Good call

I see your point there. I guess I focused on the end of the article when Will Smith is like "Also add more black people" when Chastain's comment was actually about the type of characters represented, not the # of a certain type.

I don't think so. 12 Angry Men doesn't become a better film intrinsically if 4 of the 12 are played by minorities. The Thing isn't worse because of its all male cast. Depending on the nature of the film, a lack of representation may indeed hurt the film. But it does not have direct relevance, no

I'm torn between thinking that one hand, she probably has a point, but on the other hand, I miss the days when the focus of film discussion was on the quality and themes of the films themselves, rather than how well they ticked off various boxes

I am a gonna wait for netflix?

Now we're thinking

I…regrettably don't follow

Excellent choice. I doubt there is a single such named film

Ugh why did it have to be called The Square? There's already, just in the last decade, a great Australian neo-noir called that and a (from what I hear) excellent Egyptian documentary. Couldn't he have picked something else?

I appreciate the fact that in your review you acknowledge the movie's limited appeal. Sometimes I feel critics review a film from the perspective of a film critic and forget that the average viewer does not necessarily look forward to a 228 minute B/W film with a static camera

Colt .45 sounds interesting. Thanks for bringing it up!