<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
    xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
	<channel>
<title>MY RSS Feed</title><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/index.html</link><description>Hot News&#x21;</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><dc:creator></dc:creator><dc:rights>Copyright 2006 Davina Brewer</dc:rights><dc:date>2009-08-15T22:32:08-04:00</dc:date><admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.realmacsoftware.com/" />
<admin:errorReportsTo rdf:resource="mailto:" /><sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<sy:updateBase>2000-01-01T12:00+00:00</sy:updateBase>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 22:37:53 -0400</lastBuildDate><item><title>Summer of 2009 Blows a Big One</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Theories&#x2c; Analysis&#x2c; Spoilers</category><dc:date>2009-08-15T22:32:08-04:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/2b2b28014dd1042490611237aa235698-11.html#unique-entry-id-11</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/2b2b28014dd1042490611237aa235698-11.html#unique-entry-id-11</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:15px; ">Weakest summer I can recall in years, and I think </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em><a href="../page5/page50/page50.html" rel="self" title="Star Trek">Star Trek</a></em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> and </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em><a href="../page5/page48/page48.html" rel="self" title="The Hangover">The Hangover</a></em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> were the only highlights.  Cannot even recall a few pleasant surprises, just </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="../page5/page47/page47.html" rel="self" title="Night at the Museum 2">weak</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> and </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="../page5/page49/page49.html" rel="self" title="Transformers 2">weaker</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> sequels and quite a few </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="../index.html" rel="self" title="G.I. Joe">stinkers</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">.  And I barely went to the movies this summer.  <br /><br />So now we lead into the dark days of fall, school is back in meaning the kids are not out, so we have nothing to watch but the dregs, slasher movies and crappy romantic comedies until the holiday season Oscar bait starts rolling out.    That is all.</span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Just for the sake of blogging.</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Theories&#x2c; Analysis&#x2c; Spoilers</category><dc:date>2009-06-01T22:49:33-04:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/14e4fa806d57243d33e039a063328a8a-10.html#unique-entry-id-10</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/14e4fa806d57243d33e039a063328a8a-10.html#unique-entry-id-10</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:15px; ">I am going to move these soon, come up with a cool URL name for the site, create a portal to all my different blogs.  And my next step will be opening the site up for comments.  The whole movie review site will be reconfigured as a blog maybe, I'll see.  Anyway, just typing out loud as I look forward to an interesting summer.<br /><br />So far, it looks like Summer Movies 2009 are 0 for Sequels with </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em><a href="../page5/page47/page47.html" rel="self" title="Night at the Museum 2">Night at the Museum</a></em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>, Terminator, </em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em><a href="../page5/page40/page40.html" rel="self" title="Wolverine">Wolverine</a></em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> and </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Angels & Demons</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> all underwhelming.  Maybe </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Transformers 2</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> can meet expectations.  Stay tuned.  </span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Ennui&#x2c; malaise&#x2c; and yawning at the movie theater:  Oscar&#xae; Season</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Theories&#x2c; Analysis&#x2c; Spoilers</category><dc:date>2009-02-04T16:55:00-05:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/7e3c5c74195fbaa47737ac67ab4db2a0-9.html#unique-entry-id-9</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/7e3c5c74195fbaa47737ac67ab4db2a0-9.html#unique-entry-id-9</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:15px; ">I am trying to figure this out and cannot.  I have very little interest in seeing anything at the movies right now.  Almost everything out there, at best, stirs up luke warm interest and a passing, "I can wait for it on HBO" attitude, as in the last few years, they've been all </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="files/a876ef397ae3d35c8146c3edbbcf2da3-7.html" rel="self" title="Movie Blog: Rebuttals:Coming Soon:  Archive Recommendations and other Randomness">dark and serious</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">, </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="../page5/atonement/atonement.html" rel="self" title="Atonement">overrated IMO</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">, or </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.angryalien.com/aa/nocountryforoldmenbuns.asp" rel="external">generally unappealing</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> to me.  <br /><br />One thing is the shift in movies and </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>what is good</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> vs. </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>what people will see ($$$)</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> vs. </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>what will win </em></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">come awards season.  In recent years, the best reviewed movie has rarely won the Oscar, instead being bested by a </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="../page5/crash/crash.html" rel="self" title="Crash">politically-bent comment on our times</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> type thing that gets a whopping 75% </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.rottentomatoes.com/help_desk/faq.php#tomatometer" rel="external">Tomatometer</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">.  And no, I am not whining about </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.angryalien.com/aa/brokebackbuns.asp" rel="external">Brokeback</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">.  The nominee with the best average reviews was </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Good Night, and Good Luck</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">, followed by </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Capote</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> with </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Munich</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> pulling up the rear.  <br /><br />Truth be written, the best movies have often failed to be nominated.  </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.michigandaily.com/content/hackman-memento-most-egregious-oscar-omssions" rel="external">Memento!</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">  See also...almost anything by Disney/Pixar, being sent to kids' table.  Ever since </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Beauty and the Beast</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> got the nod way back when, TPTB freaked the hell out, were not about the award the trophy to a children's movie and created the animation category.  Meaning some of the </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="../page5/page31/walle.html" rel="self" title="Wall-e">best movies</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> are left out year after year.  <br /><br />Another problem with all the Oscar bait is so many of this year's nominees are great character studies, a showcase of acting or directing talent.  Which is well and good but I am not always up to paying $10 just to see so-and-so act for two hours.  So while someone may be having a great revival, or turning in a once-in-a-career performance, I want a little more.  So things like </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>The Wrestler</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> and </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Milk</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> will wait for cable, as I do enjoy good performances.<br /><br />I realize there are only so many slots on the ballot, yet it bugs when better performances are overlooked, and after all this time I am still kinda disillusioned with the </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.civilwarartist.com/images/old-men-drinking.jpg" rel="external">Academy</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> for snubbing Kiki for (perhaps what is still her best work) </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Interview with the Vampire</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> (the year after Anna Paquin won for the boring </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Piano!!)</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> and think she deserved a nod.  <br /><br />It also irks when performances, IMHO, get placed in the wrong category: <br /></span><ul class="disc"><li><span style="font-size:15px; ">Juliette Binoche wins supporting for </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>The English Patient, </em></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">though she was more of a lead than Kristen Scott Thomas</span></li><li><span style="font-size:15px; ">In </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="../page5/page2/page2.html" rel="self" title="The Devil Wears Prada">Devil Wears Prada</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> Meryl Streep's Devil was secondary to the Anne Hathaway role, but was nominated as lead</span></li><li><span style="font-size:15px; ">To me Forrest Whitaker's great performance in </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Last King of Scotland</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> was a supporting role to the (un-nominatated) James McAvoy part</span></li><li><span style="font-size:15px; ">That same year Oscar snubbed the awesome (supporting or lead, YMMV) performance by Michael Sheen in </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>The Queen</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">;  Guess there is pennance for doing </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0320691/" rel="external">cheesy, gothic action crap</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> (okay, I saw the first two)</span></li></ul><span style="font-size:15px; ">And yes, I know it's political and TPTB nominate themselves in the category they think they'll win, yada yada.  Just like the stupid </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://defamer.com/hollywood/awards/ellen-burstyns-emmynominated-quarterminute-performance-189841.php" rel="external">Emmys</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">, there should be better rules about what qualifies as a lead vs. supporting (vs. what is a standout performance in an ensemble without true leads i.e. George Clooney, </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Syriana</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">.)<br /><br />Anyway this is just random clacking of the keys this LINKAPALOOZA, trying to get psyched for the movies and Oscars, and can't.  FWIW.  </span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>To Harsh or Not&#x2c; that is the question</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Review Comments</category><dc:date>2009-01-05T00:27:30-05:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/67b8de3ad086feffb9c812c19212e9b1-8.html#unique-entry-id-8</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/67b8de3ad086feffb9c812c19212e9b1-8.html#unique-entry-id-8</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:15px; ">When I updated one of the few reviews I actually bothered posting on </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://blogcritics.org/" rel="external">another blog site</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">, I was surprised to see actual comments from readers.  And that said readers thought my harshness was undeserved.  (Basically I was hard on Ashton Kutcher's acting, and the Kevin Costner not-going-gentle-into-middle-age vehicle </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="../page5/page23/guardian.html" rel="self" title="The Guardian">The Guardian</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">.)<br /><br />At first I felt rebuffed, hurt the folks commenting did see the humor in the harshness, appreciate my exaggeration and hyperbole.  (And who said a review </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>had</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> to be funny?)  Blogs are for healthy disagreements of course, and while these comments felt short of engaging dialogues, they were fair representation of the readers' thoughts and perfectly valid nonetheless.  So I decided to search for a few other reviews, to see if I perhaps need to tamper my opinions.  <br /></span><ul class="disc"><li><span style="font-size:15px; ">Reviews of Paul Walker and Jessica Alba's </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><em>Into the Blue</em></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> called it "</span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ae/movies/reviews/3375597.html" rel="external">chum, to be thrown in with the sharks</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">" and also question the "</span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.reelviews.net/php_review_template.php?identifier=926" rel="external">thespian skills</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">" of its "stars."</span></li><li><span style="font-size:15px; ">I took a peak at other reviews of </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/guardian/" rel="external">The Guardian</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; ">, which earned an impressive 34% approval rate.  Phrases like "schlock," water-logged" and "sinker" were common.</span></li></ul><span style="font-size:15px; ">So what if I think folks like Paul Walker, Keanu Reeves, Jessica Alba, Tara Reid have the thespian abilities of ornamental kale? Big deal.  They're laughing all the way to the bank and keeping the </span><span style="font-size:15px; "><a href="http://www.razzies.com/" rel="external">Razzies</a></span><span style="font-size:15px; "> in business.  <br /><br />Perhaps I need to incorporate some warning to the website.  </span><span style="font-size:15px; font-weight:bold; "><em>Beware gentle readers, there be snark ahead!</em></span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Coming Soon:  Archive Recommendations and other Randomness</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Theories&#x2c; Analysis&#x2c; Spoilers</category><dc:date>2008-07-10T15:57:41-04:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/a876ef397ae3d35c8146c3edbbcf2da3-7.html#unique-entry-id-7</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/a876ef397ae3d35c8146c3edbbcf2da3-7.html#unique-entry-id-7</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:14px; ">Just thinking out loud, via keyboard.  I may start a "How'd I miss it?" or "That's why I missed it" section of the archive.  Basically something I've caught via the DVR (one of the best technotoys ever) and feel merits an entry, or a blog mention.  <br /><br />For example, I will pass on </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>In the Bedroom</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">, a heavy well-acted drama from several years back.  Worthy of the award nods to be sure, but unless you're a student of the craft of acting, or filmmaking in general, just don't see you getting much enjoyment from it.  Just one of those hard movies to watch that, while good, you have to be in the right frame of mind to see.  To wit, still have not seen </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Mystic River</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">; and while it was a good movie, have I really no desire to see another Eastwood "gem" </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Million Dollar Baby </em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">again.  So that puts </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>In the Bedroom</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> in the "that's why" category, erased from DVR memory, a "one-view" wonder.<br /><br />I will also cover lesser movies that have great moments.  There are some movies, that while not great or perfect or anything, still have a scene or two that I just love and if I catch them at the right time, have to sit down and watch again.  Hard to explain.  Many are guilty pleasures or decent movies that could have been more.  One such movie is </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>In the Land of Women</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">, with Adam Brody and Meg Ryan.  No I won't do a full review, and yes it is way too ovary-centric for the masses, and even as a chick-flick it was kind of weak.  But it had moments and promise, just failed to be new or fresh or deliver on something more.  <br /><br />The older and maligned </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Something to Talk About</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> with Julia Roberts and Dennis Quaid, while not a perfect movie, surprised me.  I knew nothing of it, other than it received so-so reviews and poor box office, and it cracked me up. Yes the "Southern" bullshit is well, bullshit; and the family dramarama is overbearing; but there are still some scenes and moments of humor and relationships that ring true and made me laugh.  YMMV. <br /><br />Another movie I do recommend is </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Beautiful Girls</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">.  As a whole it is a decent chick flick as much about the guys as anything else.  While the friendship scenes with the guys are nice, I love every scene with a young Natalie Portman.  In a small role, she made an impression, matching up well against Timothy Hutton and creating great little moments.  <br /><br />All for now.  Off to write a full review of the excellent </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Waitress</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">.  </span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Romantic Comedies &#x3c;i&#x3e;Entertainment Weekly&#x3c;/i&#x3e; Loves to Hate</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Theories&#x2c; Analysis&#x2c; Spoilers</category><dc:date>2008-06-04T16:36:11-04:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/08b4628b5d9334ae1ac4d9a85ac9f705-6.html#unique-entry-id-6</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/08b4628b5d9334ae1ac4d9a85ac9f705-6.html#unique-entry-id-6</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:14px; ">I just read this article on </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><a href="http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20204271,00.html" rel="external">Entertainment Weekly's website</a></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">, in which they and some folks at PopWatchers dis 19 romantic comedies they don't love.  I mostly agree with them.  <br /><br />Both </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>The Wedding Date</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> and </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Because I Said So</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> which I was forced to watch; have refused on </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Summer Catch</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">, </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>27 Dresses</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">.  YES they listed </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>The Truth About Cats and Dogs</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">!! Praise sweet merciful Jesus, I did not like that movie.  They ask what the hell was so romantic about </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>What Women Want</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">, and I agree.  And consider it a non-romantic comedy, a faux chick flick but from the man's side (similar to </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><a href="../page5/page18/weddingcrashers.html" rel="self" title="Wedding Crashers">Wedding Crashers</a></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">).  <br /><br />I think TPTB missed the point of a few movies on their list.  </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>The Family Stone</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> made the cut, which yeah I guessed every plot point from a glimpse at the movie poster (and was proven right when I got stuck watching it on HBO).  TPTB acknowledge that </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Stone</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> is not really a RomCom as they call them, but then they list </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Bounce</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">.  <br /><br />I so remember that movie, going to see it with friends and leaving the theater talking about how the promo monkeys fucked it up royally.  Promotion is all about managing expectations, and they sucked at it.  While I cannot recall the lines now, the trailers for </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Bounce</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> all had some funny little quips and heartfelt speeches, designed to make it seem like a romantic comedy.  Hell--that downer was not even a dramedy, it was a melancholy chick flick drama. Not saying it would have been a better movie but had it been promoted as something else, I think critical and fan reactions may have been different.  See also </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Return to Me</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> (and did anyone see that movie?).<br /><br />Matthew McConaughey made the list in </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Failure to Launch</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">, for having no chemistry with SJP (of </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>The Family Stone</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">) which I can see, and they did not hate </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>The Holiday</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> enough for me.  Sticking Kate Winslet with Jack Black is wrong on so many levels.  </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Notting Hill</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> is often discussed in this vein, and I tend to agree... mostly because "the girl" screwed up at every turn and did not deserve "the boy."  I've heard it argued the other way, and just shake my head.  </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>EW </em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">cites a cringe worthy line..you know the one. I have heard worse.  <br /><br />Finally got around to watching </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Under the Tuscan Sun</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">, not a true RomCom but still... and aside from the whole "Diane Lane cannot get laid" bullshit...one line just killed me and had me throwing shit at the TV.  "If you do not cheer up, I will be forced to make love to you.. and I have never been unfaithful to my wife," or something like that, from some Italian dickweed (who was sort of nice the rest of the time in an otherwise  meh movie) with a MONSTER crush on Lane, trying to blame her for his would-be adultery. That line was ASS.  <br /><br />Other omissions:  <br /></span><ul class="disc"><li><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>The Wedding Planner</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> was just as schlocky and predictable as any of these, with minimal chemistry.  </span></li><li><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Head Over Heels</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> (I have friends with bad taste who drag me to every RomCom out there).  Cheesy, silly, lame, stupid, plotless, pointless .. the list goes on and on.  </span></li><li><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Maid in Manhattan</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">.  OMFG.  Talk about lack of chemistry.  Ralph Fiennes looks like he'd rather be having root canal, you can practically see him mentally adding his paycheck in half his scenes with J-Lo.  It makes </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><a href="http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20198001,00.html" rel="external">EW 24 Bad RomCom</a></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> list but not the 19 they love to hate.  </span></li></ul><span style="font-size:14px; ">TPTB rightly acknowledge that one person's crap is another's guilty pleasure (</span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Only You, Simply Irresistible</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">), and I don't feel all </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>that</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> guilty for enjoying </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Sweet Home Alabama</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">.  One critic is more upset at the appropriation of songs for movie titles, rather than the movie itself.  And </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>What a Girl Wants</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">-while a cheesy, grating pop song-is a decent movie with an adorable Colin Firth.<br /><br />Pretty much anything with Sandra Bullock, Reese Witherspoon, Drew Barrymore, Kate Hudson, Jennifer Aniston, Meg Ryan, John Cusack, Hugh Jackman, MM, Hugh Grant, or Patrick Dempsey has a fair shot of being a fair to downright crappy RomCom.  Even some of the allegedly good ones have been panned at one point or another.  I have read convincing critiques of </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Pretty Woman</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> and the like, can see how they are "bad."  On particularly dour day while watching </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Sleepless in Seattle</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">, my snark machine took over, subjugating my suspension of disbelief...and the movie's been ruined ever sense.  <br /><br />As long as there's "date night" there will be Romantic Comedies:  crappy, shitty, lame, dumb, so-so, decent to almost okay, "for the guy" fake outs (</span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Knocked Up</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">) and everything in between. </span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Summer Movies&#x2c; the 2008 edition.</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><dc:subject>Movie Blog: Rebuttals</dc:subject><dc:date>2008-05-24T22:05:00-04:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/c860e0a204cd7fa4049b0e73ed393f39-5.html#unique-entry-id-5</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/c860e0a204cd7fa4049b0e73ed393f39-5.html#unique-entry-id-5</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:14px; ">Another summer.  Another deluge of movies to review, the usual suspects of sequels, would be blockbusters and also rans. <br /><br />Already seen the </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Indiana Jones</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> and </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Narnia</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> sequels, both pretty good.  </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Iron Man</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> rocked, pleasantly surprising.  </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>X-Files</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">, again?  Like did not that ship sail! But hey it gives me hope for a </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Serenity</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> sequel.  Looking like total ass--the </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Sex and the City</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> movie.  You know I watched the show, funny when it was surreal and quirky.  Then it became a hit, lost some of its bite and became an average dramedy.  And the reruns--well edited for anything good--have not done it any favors.  And while touched with tragedy, </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>The Dark Knight</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> looks pretty good.   <br /><br />What is </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Hancock</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; ">?  It's about Will Smith making big $ on the Fourth of July, that's what.  This summer may also include a sleeper hit, a kids favorite (maybe </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Wall-E</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> or that </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><em>Panda</em></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> thing).  And plenty of crap.  Cannot decide which looks worse, that </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><a href="http://www.lovegurumovie.com/" rel="external">Mike Meyers thing</a></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> or the latest </span><span style="font-size:14px; "><a href="http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/youdontmesswiththezohan/" rel="external">Adam Sandler goofball</a></span><span style="font-size:14px; "> comedy (in which Rob Schneider somehow manages to keep his SAG card and collect a paycheck).  Not enough NO in the world.  <br /><br />Pass the popcorn, but bring the Tums just in case.  </span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>I&#x27;m back.</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Review Comments</category><dc:date>2008-03-11T00:00:29-04:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/2582ef5b7cace4cdb0c4ae141ee56c64-4.html#unique-entry-id-4</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/2582ef5b7cace4cdb0c4ae141ee56c64-4.html#unique-entry-id-4</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:13px; ">Just could not get some of these thoughts out of my head, need something to do.  So, maybe I will keep this going.   </span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>I&#x27;ll start.  Pirates post.</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Theories&#x2c; Analysis&#x2c; Spoilers</category><dc:date>2006-07-27T18:30:38-04:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/1e790a8ed1aef80c698566c4049f0cb4-2.html#unique-entry-id-2</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/1e790a8ed1aef80c698566c4049f0cb4-2.html#unique-entry-id-2</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:14px; color:#ff451b; ">I recently posted this on another blog.  Thought I'd list it here too.  You can read the whole blog </span><span style="font-size:14px; color:#ff451b; "><a href="http://the-zaniak.livejournal.com/372452.html?view=1729508#t1729508" rel="external">here</a></span><span style="font-size:14px; color:#ff451b; ">.  </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><br /><br /></span><span style="font-size:13px; ">Agree with most of ang wa, and some of Peter's comments. Interesting aspects that I did not consider. You have some great points, witty, but  "left him behind TWICE because of that "he fell behind" code."  I know his crew, with Mr. Gibb, left twice, but I just watched </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><em>Pearl</em></span><span style="font-size:13px; "> again and Will & Elizabeth only did once(?) since the </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><em>Pearl</em></span><span style="font-size:13px; "> crew had already left. But really, much like the whole kiss/shackle in </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><em>Chest</em></span><span style="font-size:13px; ">, Will KO'd Jack with an oar and left him there, possibly to die, was not so much of a "fall behind" as a trick/betrayal.<br /><br />And that is I think part of the point.<br /><br />Jack is not a "done" character yet. Classic anti-hero to be sure, TPTB are simply making an argument about being a "good man" and a "pirate: def. as whoring, thieving, manipulative, drunk bastard(?)" are not necessarily mutually exclusive. And they are juxtaposing that with the "good" Will/Elizabeth.<br /><br />Betrayal requires 2 parties: the betrayer and the betrayed. Jack doesn't seem to hold a grudge (hates </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><em>Pearl</em></span><span style="font-size:13px; "> crew, not Will, Gibb) about being left behind, only heckling Mr. Gibb about the code at the end. But Will, in </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><em>Pearl</em></span><span style="font-size:13px; ">, has a guilty face when he says that Jack "fell behind." Yet he doesn't seem to feel too bad about leaving a "man who would trade another man's life for a ship" (to quote Elizabeth) behind. Why? He's "a pirate" to quote Will, and perhaps it's not wrong to betray a pirate(?). In </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><em>Chest</em></span><span style="font-size:13px; ">, Elizabeth obviously feels remorse (though claiming she's "not sorry"), but whether she feels bad about the trick, or the kiss (and it's implications) I cannot say.<br /><br />As to Sparrow's selfishness and all, I say "pirate." Agreeing with the other posts, he planned to use Will as "leverage" to get back his ship, working each turn of events to his best advantage in </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><em>Pearl</em></span><span style="font-size:13px; "> and he managed to work it all out in the end. Yes he tricks Will, sells him out, wants the key/chest for his own ends, yada-Pirate, but getting the heart will save himself (Jack's priority 1) and everyone else, in theory. Part of his not caring for others is "pirate," the other part an act. Flirting with Elizabeth is just sport. Yes he'd tap that if he could, don't think he's really making a play.<br /><br />I think some people see a "change" in Jack because, like Will and Elizabeth, they WANT him to want to be a good man, and act like the hero we "know he can be" because we love the character so much. Jack gets a pass from everyone (audience and film characters) at the end of </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><em>Pearl</em></span><span style="font-size:13px; "> because it all worked out OK in the end. After </span><span style="font-size:13px; "><em>Chest</em></span><span style="font-size:13px; "> - to state the obvious - Jack, Will, et al, the story - not done yet. And what I see evolving as much as anything, is that Will & Elizabeth are already a lot more like Jack than they think. Elizabeth has always had a fascination with pirates, and it would seem does want a pirate. His name is Will. IMO.</span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>What did YOU think of the movie?</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Theories&#x2c; Analysis&#x2c; Spoilers</category><dc:date>2006-07-01T18:20:00-04:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/a24ca18066da4c7c7cdf88b989a19e11-1.html#unique-entry-id-1</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/a24ca18066da4c7c7cdf88b989a19e11-1.html#unique-entry-id-1</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:13px; ">I try not to spoil movies too much by giving away all the story details.  Ergo THIS is where you can give your analysis of a particular plot point, preview of upcoming attraction.  <br /><br />Same rules:  respect those around you.  No just posting "you're an asshole, and stupid."  While that may be true, it doesn't add to the discourse.  If you do, you'll be banned and burn in Hell.  And of course, try to keep it simple.  I don't want to spend hours reading pages and pages of the same crap.</span>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Feedback appreciated.  Play Nice.</title><dc:creator></dc:creator><category>Review Comments</category><dc:date>2006-06-27T18:13:00-04:00</dc:date><link>http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/3f4f822cb645f7e59b5e972fdf201ec3-0.html#unique-entry-id-0</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://bellsouthpwp2.net/s/3/secretme/blog/files/3f4f822cb645f7e59b5e972fdf201ec3-0.html#unique-entry-id-0</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size:13px; ">Ok.  I am going to TRY to do this blogging, commenting thing.  Yes it'll be a pain to have it on other pages from the reviews, but it's less work for me.  And that always trumps your comfort.  Feel free to email me direct, or post your comments here.  <br /><br />NOTE: this section is for comments on the </span><span style="font-size:13px; font-weight:bold; ">REVIEWS</span><span style="font-size:13px; ">, not the movies.  Keep your posts about the reviews and other comments, not other posters.  Snark is fine, but overly aggressive poster or reviewer bashing will get you a dozen lashes, a week in Purgatory listening to nothing but Yanni and Britney Spears, and a swift boot off the site.</span>]]></content:encoded></item></channel>
</rss>