The World Wide Rag
| Preemptive Strike: Sight Unseen Movie Reviews |
The revered film critic Pauline Kael famously claimed that she
never watched any movie more than once. In our never-ending
efforts to one-up everyone in history, we, The Rag’s film critics, will
now review movies without ever watching them at all.
We feel qualified to perform this public service after decades of
being ripped off by inferior Hollywood product. From now on, we’
re going to save ourselves — and our readers — the time and the
money of watching every piece of poop that drips out of the
feature film pipeline. If nothing else, it’ll make us feel better.
You may well ask, “How can you in good conscience criticize
something you’ve never even seen?” Trust us. We can do it.
never watched any movie more than once. In our never-ending
efforts to one-up everyone in history, we, The Rag’s film critics, will
now review movies without ever watching them at all.
We feel qualified to perform this public service after decades of
being ripped off by inferior Hollywood product. From now on, we’
re going to save ourselves — and our readers — the time and the
money of watching every piece of poop that drips out of the
feature film pipeline. If nothing else, it’ll make us feel better.
You may well ask, “How can you in good conscience criticize
something you’ve never even seen?” Trust us. We can do it.
| The Critical Pantheon |
| Paulne Kael, Andrew Sarris and Bill Needle |
I come to praise critics, not to bury them.
American magazines and daily newspapers are doing a
great job of that already.
After decades of assigning the best film critics in the
country to review the worst movies Hollywood had to
offer, the media powers that be are now
unceremoniously pushing those same critics out the
door, in order to cut jobs and slow the hemorrhaging
caused by dwindling readership and advertising. Most
notably this year, Newsweek bought out the contract of
its 30-year film critic David Ansen; the Village Voice let
go critics Dennis Lim and Nathan Lee, and Jonathan
Rosenbaum retired from the Chicago Reader.
With this column, we at The Rag are merely trying to
strike back, to “speak truth to power,” as it were, for
movie fans and especially film critics everywhere.
American magazines and daily newspapers are doing a
great job of that already.
After decades of assigning the best film critics in the
country to review the worst movies Hollywood had to
offer, the media powers that be are now
unceremoniously pushing those same critics out the
door, in order to cut jobs and slow the hemorrhaging
caused by dwindling readership and advertising. Most
notably this year, Newsweek bought out the contract of
its 30-year film critic David Ansen; the Village Voice let
go critics Dennis Lim and Nathan Lee, and Jonathan
Rosenbaum retired from the Chicago Reader.
With this column, we at The Rag are merely trying to
strike back, to “speak truth to power,” as it were, for
movie fans and especially film critics everywhere.
depend less on the advice of critics and are more likely
to get their information straight from the movie studios,
unfiltered, in the form of trailers and publicity pieces on
YouTube.
You can find critics all over the Web willing to watch bad
movies so you don’t have to. We at The Rag are
different. We don’t want to watch movies we know will
be bad — but that won’t keep us from criticizing them.
We’ll base our opinions on that same free information —
trailers and publicity online — and skip adding any
money to the box office coffers of crappy movies. It’s
film criticism for the 21st Century, and it’s the film
criticism the industry deserves.
The movie business is so obsessed with opening day
figures and overseas box office that the quality of any
individual film is almost beside the point. Even fans
seem more interested in the behind-the-scenes aspects
of filmmaking (salaries, box office) than the movies
themselves.
There seems to be no point in critics actually going to
see dubious-looking movies when the element of
surprise is in such short supply at the multiplex. Even
“sleepers” like Juno or Little Miss Sunshine feature well-
known actors and are powered by multi-million dollar
studio publicity campaigns.
to get their information straight from the movie studios,
unfiltered, in the form of trailers and publicity pieces on
YouTube.
You can find critics all over the Web willing to watch bad
movies so you don’t have to. We at The Rag are
different. We don’t want to watch movies we know will
be bad — but that won’t keep us from criticizing them.
We’ll base our opinions on that same free information —
trailers and publicity online — and skip adding any
money to the box office coffers of crappy movies. It’s
film criticism for the 21st Century, and it’s the film
criticism the industry deserves.
The movie business is so obsessed with opening day
figures and overseas box office that the quality of any
individual film is almost beside the point. Even fans
seem more interested in the behind-the-scenes aspects
of filmmaking (salaries, box office) than the movies
themselves.
There seems to be no point in critics actually going to
see dubious-looking movies when the element of
surprise is in such short supply at the multiplex. Even
“sleepers” like Juno or Little Miss Sunshine feature well-
known actors and are powered by multi-million dollar
studio publicity campaigns.
| Dave Kehr, Jonathan Rosenbaum and Joe Bob Briggs |
So this is where we put our foot down. In the name of
Larry the Cable Guy “comedy,” or worship at the feet of
the upcoming Hannah Montana opus.
There’s already been so much abuse of film critics in the
past. Here is a partial list of some of the obviously
horrendous movies that the New York Times has forced
Dave Kehr, one of America’s best critics, to review in
recent years:
Agent Cody Banks
Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London
Benji: Off the Leash!
The Butterfly Effect
Chasing Papi
Corky Romano
Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd
For Da Love of Money
Jason X
Jeepers Creepers 2
Jonah: A Veggie Tales Movie
NASCAR: The Imax Experience
Pokemon Heroes
Rugrats Go Wild
Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed
Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2
The Lizzie McGuire Movie
Tomcats
What a Girl Wants
White Chicks
You Got Served
Yu-Gi-Oh! The Movie
One can’t help but suspect that some New York Times
bigwig got a kind of perverse pleasure in sending Kehr,
one of the world’s leading auteurist voices — a card-
carrying member of the American critical pantheon — to
sit in the dark and stare at Tommy Pickles and Larry the
Cucumber.
Preemptive Strike: Sight Unseen Movie Reviews is our
blow against the empire, and we present it on behalf of
all those serious-minded critics assigned for years to
cover silly-ass movies, and then given the bum’s rush
by uncaring corporations.
We also do it for all the fans that deserve better than
what Hollywood gives them.
And because we think it’s funny.
So bring on all the garbage you can muster, Movieland.
We’ll review the very worst of it.
But we won’t spend a dime — or an hour — to watch
any of it. That’s our promise.
— B.S. Garp
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008.
_____________________________________________________
Larry the Cable Guy “comedy,” or worship at the feet of
the upcoming Hannah Montana opus.
There’s already been so much abuse of film critics in the
past. Here is a partial list of some of the obviously
horrendous movies that the New York Times has forced
Dave Kehr, one of America’s best critics, to review in
recent years:
Agent Cody Banks
Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London
Benji: Off the Leash!
The Butterfly Effect
Chasing Papi
Corky Romano
Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd
For Da Love of Money
Jason X
Jeepers Creepers 2
Jonah: A Veggie Tales Movie
NASCAR: The Imax Experience
Pokemon Heroes
Rugrats Go Wild
Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed
Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2
The Lizzie McGuire Movie
Tomcats
What a Girl Wants
White Chicks
You Got Served
Yu-Gi-Oh! The Movie
One can’t help but suspect that some New York Times
bigwig got a kind of perverse pleasure in sending Kehr,
one of the world’s leading auteurist voices — a card-
carrying member of the American critical pantheon — to
sit in the dark and stare at Tommy Pickles and Larry the
Cucumber.
Preemptive Strike: Sight Unseen Movie Reviews is our
blow against the empire, and we present it on behalf of
all those serious-minded critics assigned for years to
cover silly-ass movies, and then given the bum’s rush
by uncaring corporations.
We also do it for all the fans that deserve better than
what Hollywood gives them.
And because we think it’s funny.
So bring on all the garbage you can muster, Movieland.
We’ll review the very worst of it.
But we won’t spend a dime — or an hour — to watch
any of it. That’s our promise.
— B.S. Garp
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008.
_____________________________________________________
| Journey to the Center of the Earth Meet Dave / Space Chimps |
Hollywood puts out crappy movies every month, of
course, but this is the time of year — midway through
the big summer blockbusters. The first wave of hits are
still lingering in theatres, but kids are out of school for
the summer and their families are looking for something
new to stare at in the air-conditioned dark.
That’s where this week’s batch of bad movies comes in.
Did you and your family enjoy the thrills and excitement
of Iron Man and Indiana Jones? Then why not plunk
down money to go see Journey to the Center of the
Earth? Sure, there’s no way it’ll be as good as the first
two, but it’ll be loud and fast-paced, and it might just
bring back memories of a movie you actually liked.
Still grinning about the mix of laughs and action in Get
Smart and Hancock? Get yourself a ticket to Meet Dave.
OK, the special effects look cheap, and Eddie Murphy’s
career is more likely to inspire tears than laughs these
days, but what the hell, you’re out of the house.
Are your kids still raving about Wall-E? Here’s a sure-
fire way to quiet them down: take them to see Space
Chimps. Worried that Wall-E’s arty-farty
highmindedness and ecological moral went right over
your rugrats’ heads? Sit them down in front of Space
Chimps and watch those little minds switch off like a
Nintendo Wii at bedtime.
Just don’t expect The Rag to go along for the lowered-
expectations ride.
course, but this is the time of year — midway through
the big summer blockbusters. The first wave of hits are
still lingering in theatres, but kids are out of school for
the summer and their families are looking for something
new to stare at in the air-conditioned dark.
That’s where this week’s batch of bad movies comes in.
Did you and your family enjoy the thrills and excitement
of Iron Man and Indiana Jones? Then why not plunk
down money to go see Journey to the Center of the
Earth? Sure, there’s no way it’ll be as good as the first
two, but it’ll be loud and fast-paced, and it might just
bring back memories of a movie you actually liked.
Still grinning about the mix of laughs and action in Get
Smart and Hancock? Get yourself a ticket to Meet Dave.
OK, the special effects look cheap, and Eddie Murphy’s
career is more likely to inspire tears than laughs these
days, but what the hell, you’re out of the house.
Are your kids still raving about Wall-E? Here’s a sure-
fire way to quiet them down: take them to see Space
Chimps. Worried that Wall-E’s arty-farty
highmindedness and ecological moral went right over
your rugrats’ heads? Sit them down in front of Space
Chimps and watch those little minds switch off like a
Nintendo Wii at bedtime.
Just don’t expect The Rag to go along for the lowered-
expectations ride.
| Skip the Journey |
Was Brandon Fraser actually frozen in ice the last
seven years, like in his early (and memorably terrible)
movie Encino Man? I haven’t seen this dude in years,
and suddenly he’s got two movies hitting the multiplex
within a month of each other. Maybe he fell down an
endless hole in 1991 just like in his crappy new movie,
and it’s taken him this long to crawl back to the surface.
By the look of the less than stellar special effects on
display in the trailers for Journey, he just might have
come back too soon. And judging from his rode-hard-
and-put-up-wet look at the MTV Movie Awards earlier
this summer, not to mention his Busey-in-training
guffawing and mugging every time the camera focused
on him in the audience, Brandon might want to crawl
back into hiding for a little while. How long was he in
the bomb shelter in Blast From the Past? Wasn’t it 35
years? That sounds about right.
Rating: 1 1/2 Stars
seven years, like in his early (and memorably terrible)
movie Encino Man? I haven’t seen this dude in years,
and suddenly he’s got two movies hitting the multiplex
within a month of each other. Maybe he fell down an
endless hole in 1991 just like in his crappy new movie,
and it’s taken him this long to crawl back to the surface.
By the look of the less than stellar special effects on
display in the trailers for Journey, he just might have
come back too soon. And judging from his rode-hard-
and-put-up-wet look at the MTV Movie Awards earlier
this summer, not to mention his Busey-in-training
guffawing and mugging every time the camera focused
on him in the audience, Brandon might want to crawl
back into hiding for a little while. How long was he in
the bomb shelter in Blast From the Past? Wasn’t it 35
years? That sounds about right.
Rating: 1 1/2 Stars
| Screw Dave |
Perhaps the two lowest points in Eddie Murphy’s
sketchy cinematic oeuvre are The Adventures of Pluto
Nash, in which he explored outer space and the outer
reaches of movie audiences’ patience and good will,
and Norbit, in which he portrayed about five different
characters, none of them memorably. So in his new
movie, Eddie tempts the box office fates by playing
about 10 different characters, all of which came from
outer space! It sounds positively shit-tastic!
I’ll never know. I stopped hoping the truly talented Eddie
would make good movies about 10 or 15 years ago. I
only pay attention now when he works with a good
director, which is basically never, save Frank Oz in
Bowfinger or Bill Condon in Dreamgirls. Until that
happens again, we can all wish he would return to stand-
up comedy, which he hasn’t done in more than 20
years.
Or we can just turn our attention to something —
anything — else.
Rating: 1 Star
sketchy cinematic oeuvre are The Adventures of Pluto
Nash, in which he explored outer space and the outer
reaches of movie audiences’ patience and good will,
and Norbit, in which he portrayed about five different
characters, none of them memorably. So in his new
movie, Eddie tempts the box office fates by playing
about 10 different characters, all of which came from
outer space! It sounds positively shit-tastic!
I’ll never know. I stopped hoping the truly talented Eddie
would make good movies about 10 or 15 years ago. I
only pay attention now when he works with a good
director, which is basically never, save Frank Oz in
Bowfinger or Bill Condon in Dreamgirls. Until that
happens again, we can all wish he would return to stand-
up comedy, which he hasn’t done in more than 20
years.
Or we can just turn our attention to something —
anything — else.
Rating: 1 Star
| Chimps? Are you kidding me? Fuckin' chimps? |
Chimps? Are you kidding me? Fuckin’ chimps?
Rating: 1/2 Star
— B.S. Garp
______________________________________________
Rating: 1/2 Star
— B.S. Garp
______________________________________________
| Get Smart / The Love Guru |
First came the summer wave of superheroes: Iron Man,
Indiana Jones, the Hulk Version 2.0. Now comes the
Clash of the Comics: sad-eyed Steve Carell in Get
Smart versus Maharishi Mike Myers in The Love Guru.
Everybody come quick — jester fight!
We here at The Rag like Carell; his The 40-Year-Old
Virgin is especially close to my heart, and my personal
history. And we’ve laughed at and drunkenly quoted
Myers’ myriad catchphrases more times than we’d care
to remember (thank God they didn’t have camera
phones and YouTube in the 90’s). Unfortunately, their
two current movies, which open the same day, both
look like huge, steaming piles of crap. We aren’t going
to waste our time or money going to see either of them.
That won’t stop us from reviewing them, of course.
Indiana Jones, the Hulk Version 2.0. Now comes the
Clash of the Comics: sad-eyed Steve Carell in Get
Smart versus Maharishi Mike Myers in The Love Guru.
Everybody come quick — jester fight!
We here at The Rag like Carell; his The 40-Year-Old
Virgin is especially close to my heart, and my personal
history. And we’ve laughed at and drunkenly quoted
Myers’ myriad catchphrases more times than we’d care
to remember (thank God they didn’t have camera
phones and YouTube in the 90’s). Unfortunately, their
two current movies, which open the same day, both
look like huge, steaming piles of crap. We aren’t going
to waste our time or money going to see either of them.
That won’t stop us from reviewing them, of course.
| Not as painful as his new movie. |
The Get Smart TV show was created in the mid-60s as
one of the era's many James Bond super spy spoofs.
The biggest spy movie of recent years, however,
consisted of Matt Damon wearing a t-shirt and jeans
running back and forth in front of a shaky camera. Even
the suave 60’s James Bond has been downgraded to a
beefy blonde sadist who doesn’t talk much. In this
environment, is there any reason to put out a Get Smart
movie?
Well, duh. There’s money to be made, stupid! Why else
do movies exist? (Are you starting to understand why
we don’t go watch these things?)
So, even though tiny portable cell phones are a
ubiquitous consumer product in 2008, in this movie we
have Steve Carell talking into his shoe, just like Don
Adams did in 1965. It doesn’t make any sense, it isn’t
funny, but hey, as long as they buy the tickets, who
cares?
one of the era's many James Bond super spy spoofs.
The biggest spy movie of recent years, however,
consisted of Matt Damon wearing a t-shirt and jeans
running back and forth in front of a shaky camera. Even
the suave 60’s James Bond has been downgraded to a
beefy blonde sadist who doesn’t talk much. In this
environment, is there any reason to put out a Get Smart
movie?
Well, duh. There’s money to be made, stupid! Why else
do movies exist? (Are you starting to understand why
we don’t go watch these things?)
So, even though tiny portable cell phones are a
ubiquitous consumer product in 2008, in this movie we
have Steve Carell talking into his shoe, just like Don
Adams did in 1965. It doesn’t make any sense, it isn’t
funny, but hey, as long as they buy the tickets, who
cares?
| Shaken, not stirred |
And, as the super spy who Carell competes with in the
movie, we have — The Rock, a beefy former wrestler.
Wow, is that our conception of a super spy these days?
Who’s going to be the next James Bond — Duane
“Dog” Chapman? Roger Clemens? I know George W. is
the president, but come on. Can’t we at least aim higher
in our movie fantasies?
Mel Brooks has said that he and Buck Henry conceived
Get Smart during long afternoons shooting pool at a bar
in Hollywood. When they came up with something that
made them both laugh, it went in the script. Something
tells me the new Get Smart wasn’t created in that same
happy-go-lucky spirit. But I’m not interested enough to
check it out for myself; I’ll just remain here inside my
Cone of Silence.
Rating: 1 Star
movie, we have — The Rock, a beefy former wrestler.
Wow, is that our conception of a super spy these days?
Who’s going to be the next James Bond — Duane
“Dog” Chapman? Roger Clemens? I know George W. is
the president, but come on. Can’t we at least aim higher
in our movie fantasies?
Mel Brooks has said that he and Buck Henry conceived
Get Smart during long afternoons shooting pool at a bar
in Hollywood. When they came up with something that
made them both laugh, it went in the script. Something
tells me the new Get Smart wasn’t created in that same
happy-go-lucky spirit. But I’m not interested enough to
check it out for myself; I’ll just remain here inside my
Cone of Silence.
Rating: 1 Star
| The new face of horror? |
The Love Guru is the first Myers starring vehicle since
The Cat in the Hat in 2003, and his first self-penned
comedy since Austin Powers in Goldmember in 2002.
That’s a long time, no funny. And, from the look of the
trailer and commercials for the new movie, Eric’s Boy is
a bit rusty.
In the new movie, Myers plays a second-tier self-help
guru who longs to be as successful as Deepak Chopra.
I once saw Myers tell David Letterman a long, funny
story about a fictional meeting with Chopra. These
days, Myers is putting him in his movie and doing an
episode of the Sundance Channel show “Iconoclasts”
where he hangs out with Chopra for the afternoon. A
reminder to Mike: it’s cooler to make fun of powerful
people than to suck up to them.
Watching the trailer for the movie, I didn’t laugh once;
in fact, I was a bit horrified by Myers’ appearance.
Wearing long hair, a beard and a curlicue mustache,
Myers’ face looks huge and swollen, his eyes bulbous,
his nose flat and broad. I thought, why would he make
himself up to look so hideous for a comedy? Then I
saw him out of costume on TV talking about the movie
and realized: that’s just kind of how the guy looks
these days. Sorry, man.
In the Austin Powers movies, Myers was able to
generate laughs out of the thinnest material. Having
that kind of phenomenal talent can give a performer a
false sense of confidence, and in The Love Guru Myers
seems to have fallen victim to his own hype: his
character rides a magic flying carpet, but Myers seems
to think he can walk on water, creating big laughs and
good vibes just by cracking lame jokes and mugging at
the camera. I think somebody’s in for a big fall.
The Cat in the Hat in 2003, and his first self-penned
comedy since Austin Powers in Goldmember in 2002.
That’s a long time, no funny. And, from the look of the
trailer and commercials for the new movie, Eric’s Boy is
a bit rusty.
In the new movie, Myers plays a second-tier self-help
guru who longs to be as successful as Deepak Chopra.
I once saw Myers tell David Letterman a long, funny
story about a fictional meeting with Chopra. These
days, Myers is putting him in his movie and doing an
episode of the Sundance Channel show “Iconoclasts”
where he hangs out with Chopra for the afternoon. A
reminder to Mike: it’s cooler to make fun of powerful
people than to suck up to them.
Watching the trailer for the movie, I didn’t laugh once;
in fact, I was a bit horrified by Myers’ appearance.
Wearing long hair, a beard and a curlicue mustache,
Myers’ face looks huge and swollen, his eyes bulbous,
his nose flat and broad. I thought, why would he make
himself up to look so hideous for a comedy? Then I
saw him out of costume on TV talking about the movie
and realized: that’s just kind of how the guy looks
these days. Sorry, man.
In the Austin Powers movies, Myers was able to
generate laughs out of the thinnest material. Having
that kind of phenomenal talent can give a performer a
false sense of confidence, and in The Love Guru Myers
seems to have fallen victim to his own hype: his
character rides a magic flying carpet, but Myers seems
to think he can walk on water, creating big laughs and
good vibes just by cracking lame jokes and mugging at
the camera. I think somebody’s in for a big fall.
| Myers in happier times |
For what it’s worth, we at The Rag advise Myers not to
retreat into hiding if The Love Guru bombs. Get back on
the horse, man, and make some more movies. You’re
one of the very best, you just need to work more often.
And try to work with some collaborators to come up
with story ideas: the new movie includes a hockey
team, because you like hockey; Deepak Chopra,
because you apparently like him: and was “inspired”
by George Harrison, because he wrote you a letter
before he died. That’s a lovely thought. But imagining
the quiet Beatle playing hockey with Deepak Chopra
while Mini-Me yells at them isn’t lovely. It’s grotesque.
Thank God I didn’t pay to see it.
Rating: 1/2 Star
— B.S. Garp
______________________________________________
retreat into hiding if The Love Guru bombs. Get back on
the horse, man, and make some more movies. You’re
one of the very best, you just need to work more often.
And try to work with some collaborators to come up
with story ideas: the new movie includes a hockey
team, because you like hockey; Deepak Chopra,
because you apparently like him: and was “inspired”
by George Harrison, because he wrote you a letter
before he died. That’s a lovely thought. But imagining
the quiet Beatle playing hockey with Deepak Chopra
while Mini-Me yells at them isn’t lovely. It’s grotesque.
Thank God I didn’t pay to see it.
Rating: 1/2 Star
— B.S. Garp
______________________________________________
| Sex and the City |
Full disclosure: I’m a man. If there was ever to be a
perfect movie to kick off our Sight Unseen Movie
Reviews column, Sex and the City is it. Any male critic
who expresses anything less than complete bliss and
gratitude upon seeing this movie will be castigated as a
woman-hating “old boy” chauvinist. So the question
arises: why watch the movie at all?
The Rag’s answer: We haven’t. But that won’t stop us
from reviewing it.
I’ve heard young women in small towns far from New
York City refer to HBO’s Sex and the City series as “my
bible.” Apart from the tragicomic aspects of that
statement (how sophisticated to order Cosmos with the
girls at the local Applebee’s), I was struck by the irony
of a young woman taking as her “bible” a series
created by an openly gay man, Darren Star.
That may sound offensive, but why have women taken
to heart this show, conceived by a gay man, feeling that
it is “theirs” and about their lives? And why are they so
quick to attack any heterosexual man who expresses
qualms with the show or the new movie? Heterosexual
men who spend their lives living with women, having
sex with them, being married to them, raising children
with them.
The Sex and the City movie was written and directed by
Michael Patrick King, another openly gay veteran of the
HBO series. Why do so many women look at Sex and
the City as being a definitive portrait of modern
women? Apart from the actresses involved, the
architects of the show and movie were gay males.
Movies by female filmmakers like Nicole Holofcener,
Sofia Coppola and Catherine Hardwicke that look at life
from a modern women’s perspective go begging for
attention. But make a movie about grown (mature,
even) women sitting around gossiping and ordering
drinks, and throw in some expensive fashions, and you’
ve got a summer blockbuster!
Sorry, but I’ll pass. The other summer blockbusters
may be teenage boys’ fantasies, but Sex and the City is
at heart a teenage girl’s fantasy of sophistication,
prosperity and social status. With the teen girl’s fantasy
written and directed by a gay guy, of course.
perfect movie to kick off our Sight Unseen Movie
Reviews column, Sex and the City is it. Any male critic
who expresses anything less than complete bliss and
gratitude upon seeing this movie will be castigated as a
woman-hating “old boy” chauvinist. So the question
arises: why watch the movie at all?
The Rag’s answer: We haven’t. But that won’t stop us
from reviewing it.
I’ve heard young women in small towns far from New
York City refer to HBO’s Sex and the City series as “my
bible.” Apart from the tragicomic aspects of that
statement (how sophisticated to order Cosmos with the
girls at the local Applebee’s), I was struck by the irony
of a young woman taking as her “bible” a series
created by an openly gay man, Darren Star.
That may sound offensive, but why have women taken
to heart this show, conceived by a gay man, feeling that
it is “theirs” and about their lives? And why are they so
quick to attack any heterosexual man who expresses
qualms with the show or the new movie? Heterosexual
men who spend their lives living with women, having
sex with them, being married to them, raising children
with them.
The Sex and the City movie was written and directed by
Michael Patrick King, another openly gay veteran of the
HBO series. Why do so many women look at Sex and
the City as being a definitive portrait of modern
women? Apart from the actresses involved, the
architects of the show and movie were gay males.
Movies by female filmmakers like Nicole Holofcener,
Sofia Coppola and Catherine Hardwicke that look at life
from a modern women’s perspective go begging for
attention. But make a movie about grown (mature,
even) women sitting around gossiping and ordering
drinks, and throw in some expensive fashions, and you’
ve got a summer blockbuster!
Sorry, but I’ll pass. The other summer blockbusters
may be teenage boys’ fantasies, but Sex and the City is
at heart a teenage girl’s fantasy of sophistication,
prosperity and social status. With the teen girl’s fantasy
written and directed by a gay guy, of course.
| "Are we simply romantically challenged, or are we sluts?" |
The only possible reason for a heterosexual man to go
see this movie (other than to appease his female
companion) would be to stare at beautiful women.
Unfortunately, “Sex and the City” stars Sarah Jessica
Parker, Kim Cattrall. Cynthia Nixon and Kristin Davis.
Nixon was cool in the “Tanner '88” series but was
never physically attractive; Kristin Davis has always
been pretty but not sexy: and Kim Cattrall was hot
“back in the day,” as they say (“the day” being when I
was in junior high school. And I’m a middle-aged guy
now).
Sarah Jessica Parker was a cute nerd in her glasses on
the old “Square Pegs” show (though I preferred her
chubby brunette friend with braces), but how she and
Jennifer Aniston came to be two of the reigning sex
symbols of the 1990s is one of those great modern
mysteries (if not, in fact, an example of mass hypnosis).
She’s always been a skinny little girl with a big nose.
“Kind of cute” at best; “pretty” would be pushing it.
“Sex symbol” is so ridiculous as to induce a watery-
eyed, laughing-till-you-start-coughing jag. And now she
has that same “well-kept” (so long as you don’t notice
the veiny arms and claw-like hands) look as the
Madonna of recent years, and the same freaky “Yes, I’m
sexy and I dare you to say I’m not” stare, employed
while she’s decked out in clothing and jewelry that
most Americans couldn’t afford if they’d saved every
penny they’d ever made in their lives.
see this movie (other than to appease his female
companion) would be to stare at beautiful women.
Unfortunately, “Sex and the City” stars Sarah Jessica
Parker, Kim Cattrall. Cynthia Nixon and Kristin Davis.
Nixon was cool in the “Tanner '88” series but was
never physically attractive; Kristin Davis has always
been pretty but not sexy: and Kim Cattrall was hot
“back in the day,” as they say (“the day” being when I
was in junior high school. And I’m a middle-aged guy
now).
Sarah Jessica Parker was a cute nerd in her glasses on
the old “Square Pegs” show (though I preferred her
chubby brunette friend with braces), but how she and
Jennifer Aniston came to be two of the reigning sex
symbols of the 1990s is one of those great modern
mysteries (if not, in fact, an example of mass hypnosis).
She’s always been a skinny little girl with a big nose.
“Kind of cute” at best; “pretty” would be pushing it.
“Sex symbol” is so ridiculous as to induce a watery-
eyed, laughing-till-you-start-coughing jag. And now she
has that same “well-kept” (so long as you don’t notice
the veiny arms and claw-like hands) look as the
Madonna of recent years, and the same freaky “Yes, I’m
sexy and I dare you to say I’m not” stare, employed
while she’s decked out in clothing and jewelry that
most Americans couldn’t afford if they’d saved every
penny they’d ever made in their lives.
| And she's the hot one. |
I can see those “Sex and the City” fans now, nodding
women’s physical appearances with this guy.”
Well, maybe. But I’d counter that it’s all about fashion,
conspicuous consumption and wish fulfillment with
you ladies. At least on the basis of this crappy movie.
Which I haven’t seen.
Rating: 1/2 a star. (We won’t rate it zero because we don’
t know whether Kim Cattrall appears nude in the film or
not. If the movie contained nude footage of her from 25
years ago, we’d give it a full star. If the movie contained
nude footage of Sarah Jessica Parker, at any age, we’d
give it a negative star rating just on general principle.)
— B.S. Garp
women’s physical appearances with this guy.”
Well, maybe. But I’d counter that it’s all about fashion,
conspicuous consumption and wish fulfillment with
you ladies. At least on the basis of this crappy movie.
Which I haven’t seen.
Rating: 1/2 a star. (We won’t rate it zero because we don’
t know whether Kim Cattrall appears nude in the film or
not. If the movie contained nude footage of her from 25
years ago, we’d give it a full star. If the movie contained
nude footage of Sarah Jessica Parker, at any age, we’d
give it a negative star rating just on general principle.)
— B.S. Garp
| Beverly Hills Chihuahua / Flash of Genius / Religulous |
October is here, bringing us into fall, which is when the studios start
trotting out their prestige pictures, with visions of Oscar nominations
dancing in their heads.
That means we should finally get some excellent, or at least
half-decent, movies in the theatres, right?
Well, not just yet. Take a look at the shit-tastic souffle of bad films
being released this weekend. But fair warning: hold your nose while
you're doing it.
trotting out their prestige pictures, with visions of Oscar nominations
dancing in their heads.
That means we should finally get some excellent, or at least
half-decent, movies in the theatres, right?
Well, not just yet. Take a look at the shit-tastic souffle of bad films
being released this weekend. But fair warning: hold your nose while
you're doing it.
| Attack of the Yippee Dogs |
Don't you love talking animals movies? Don't you think that's cute?
Yeah, you do? Then get the fuck out of my face. Idiot.
What can you say about a movie that seems to have been inspired by
Paris Hilton's pet choices?
Beverly Hills Chihuahua is a depressing example of casting appealing
performers (Jamie Lee Curtis, Piper Perabo) in absolutely repellent
garbage. Perabo starred in the cartoon-inspired bomb Rocky and
Bullwinkle. Didn't she learn her lesson? Make real movies, damnit!
And the "voice talent" in this film includes that genius voice-over artist
Drew Barrymore. You know, "I sshpeak with a lisshhpp" Drew
Barrymore? Pixar is smart enough to use unknown but talented
voices in its better films. This is not a Pixar movie. Duhh.
Rating: 1 1/2 stars (Perabo is cute, Curtis is funny and the dogs should
at least make very small kids squeal with delight. Adults should bring a
book, however.)
Yeah, you do? Then get the fuck out of my face. Idiot.
What can you say about a movie that seems to have been inspired by
Paris Hilton's pet choices?
Beverly Hills Chihuahua is a depressing example of casting appealing
performers (Jamie Lee Curtis, Piper Perabo) in absolutely repellent
garbage. Perabo starred in the cartoon-inspired bomb Rocky and
Bullwinkle. Didn't she learn her lesson? Make real movies, damnit!
And the "voice talent" in this film includes that genius voice-over artist
Drew Barrymore. You know, "I sshpeak with a lisshhpp" Drew
Barrymore? Pixar is smart enough to use unknown but talented
voices in its better films. This is not a Pixar movie. Duhh.
Rating: 1 1/2 stars (Perabo is cute, Curtis is funny and the dogs should
at least make very small kids squeal with delight. Adults should bring a
book, however.)
| Compared to this movie, a windshield wiper is the Mona Lisa |
actor, and his portrayal of Bob Crane should've been Oscar-nominated.
But do you really want to watch him in a movie about the inventor of the
windshield wiper?
Would you want to watch anybody in that movie?
If Flash of Genius starred Daniel Day Lewis, an honest-to-God talking dog
and the ghosts of Marlon Brando and Elvis, I might sit still for it.
As it is, sorry, Greg. Better luck next time.
Honestly, fucking windshield wipers?
Why not do a movie about the inventor of the nail clipper? Or the shoe
horn? Or the sanitary pad?
We at The Rag might like that last one, actually. Maybe we could be
consultants. We work cheap!
Rating: 1 star (Kinnear can probably work up some audience sympathy for
his lovable loser character. I have more sympathy for anyone forced to
actually sit through this movie.)
But do you really want to watch him in a movie about the inventor of the
windshield wiper?
Would you want to watch anybody in that movie?
If Flash of Genius starred Daniel Day Lewis, an honest-to-God talking dog
and the ghosts of Marlon Brando and Elvis, I might sit still for it.
As it is, sorry, Greg. Better luck next time.
Honestly, fucking windshield wipers?
Why not do a movie about the inventor of the nail clipper? Or the shoe
horn? Or the sanitary pad?
We at The Rag might like that last one, actually. Maybe we could be
consultants. We work cheap!
Rating: 1 star (Kinnear can probably work up some audience sympathy for
his lovable loser character. I have more sympathy for anyone forced to
actually sit through this movie.)
| "Hey, is that your Dad?" |
Remember back when Bill Maher was funny? Me neither.
Bachelor Bill's lame, tepid, nice-guy stand up act couldn't draw laughs, or
flies, back in the 80s when he was an occasional guest on Letterman.
Twenty years later, he's enough of an esteemed social critic to warrant
his own Michael Moore-style documentary, Religulous, in which he makes
fun of religious people for an hour and a half.
At some point in the last two decades he grew a set of balls. He still hasn't
located that funny bone, however. He's sure as hell never tickled mine.
Bachelor Bill's lame, tepid, nice-guy stand up act couldn't draw laughs, or
flies, back in the 80s when he was an occasional guest on Letterman.
Twenty years later, he's enough of an esteemed social critic to warrant
his own Michael Moore-style documentary, Religulous, in which he makes
fun of religious people for an hour and a half.
At some point in the last two decades he grew a set of balls. He still hasn't
located that funny bone, however. He's sure as hell never tickled mine.
| And Bill Maher. |
have kept the lively discussions going, but he increasingly developed habits like
hitting on female guests, verbally bullying low-key male guests and generally
behaving like a smart-ass know-it-all.
hitting on female guests, verbally bullying low-key male guests and generally
behaving like a smart-ass know-it-all.