NY Times Movie Blurb Poetry and some quality snark

[lumineaux]

“The Wolfman” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). It has human entrails, arterial sprays and the faintest glimmer of sex.

The review itself has some pretty nice lines too:  "The climactic showdown resembles an extreme-fighting cage match conducted by a pair of rabid Wookies."  (http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/02/12/movies/12wolfman.html)


But the mild snark directed at The Wolfman is nothing compared to what the NYT unleashes on Valentine's Day:  "The best and really only sensible thing to say about the dire romantic comedy “Valentine’s Day,” which is neither romantic nor remotely comedic, is that it makes you appreciate and long for the breeziness, acting and basic competency — the decent lighting, focused cameras and choreographed action — of “Love Actually,” the ingratiating British movie it transparently and ineptly rips off."
http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/02/12/movies/12valentine.html


Roger Ebert damns Valentine's Day in classic style:  ""Valentine's Day" is being marketed as a Date Movie. I think it's more of a First-Date Movie. If your date likes it, do not date that person again. And if you like it, there may not be a second date."
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100210/REVIEWS/100219994

Comments

[nazrynn.livejournal.com]

DAMN! Ebert totally burned Valentine's Day. :)

It's funny, because after hearing what movies were coming out this weekend, I could not wait to see what NYT Blurb Poetry you had available to share with us today. :D

[blinkensopps.livejournal.com]

I like the Roger Ebert line. We thought it looked just like Love Actually as well. Nothing in the commercials makes me want to see it.