And I won’t see Clerks 2 because of Dogma.Īs for his other movies…. I won’t watch Dogma again, and wouldn’t have seen it if I’d known it was a Church-bashing nightmare. (Just thinking about the Buddy Christ cracks me up - that’s what cafeteria Catholics and New Age “Christians” want, right? Just some guy they can “rap” with, not their Lord and Saviour whose appearance would make them fall on their face.) Especially the spectacle of George Carlin dressed as a bishop (how utterly appalling, all I could do was laugh), the Buddy Christ, the Golgothan, and Mooby the Golden Cow. I hated the misinformation, defamation and hatred of the Church in Dogma, but couldn’t help laughing at much of that movie, either. I must sheepishly admit to laughing myself silly at a few Kevin Smith movies, and having a soft spot for Jay and Silent Bob. Thus, the few hours per week I have to spend on film would be better spent elsewhere. My sense is that the world doesn’t need another review of Garfield 2, and very few people would care about my review of Nacho Libre. After that it’s a matter of time and opportunity. There will always be more movies I don’t review than I do, and lots of movies falling between the cracks.īasically, I try to review films where I think the interest is greatest, or where it should be greatest, and where I think the interest will still be in five years, and where I think I have a particular contribution to make.
#Mr and mrs smith screenit movie
The inexorable fact of it is that as a father of four (almost certainly five within the next 36 hours) with a full-time non-film 9 to 5 and other non-film interests, I can only review at most one movie per week opening in theaters, and maybe a DVD review or two on top of that. Thanks for the vote of confidence, Suzanne. Which reminds me, SDG: I have had to go to other sources to find out about Nacho Libre and Garfield 2–where are your reviews for these movies? He can rant and curse and complain all he wants but in the end, he looks more like a scandalized Puritan witch-hunter than the supposed “Progressive” he sells himself to be. What little art there was in his early films has become weighed down with the self-importance of this pocket-sized messiah. What once passed for edginess is now overly indulgent redundancy. Perhaps the problem is that since giving God the boot, Smith has become the center of his own universe.Īn “edgy” “artist” like Smith should be happy that his movie has peeved off a “conservative” like Siegel who liked Brokeback.īut the fact is, Smith is neither edgy nor an artist. If Smith expects the world of Catholics to “lighten up” about his unabashedly self-serving attack on God and the Church, then why can’t he lighten up about one reviewer storming out of one of his movies? He cannot possibly think his movies would hit the mark with everyone, so why all the self-righteous ad hominem attacks against Siegel? No matter how many childish remarks you make about a man’s mustache, you still will not convince anyone of the worthiness of your movie (or the of rudeness of walking out on it). It is singular how a man who makes a living making films with the intent to challenge and provoke people would take one critic’s actions so personally.
0 kommentar(er)
