Friday, November 24, 2006

It's Friday

There was a time when my week was framed by Tuesday (the day that new music comes out) and Friday (new movie day-usually). Okay, it probably wasn't that long ago. Okay, it was last week. Okay, it's right now.

While I haven't been watching too many movies of late I still like to keep up-to-date on what is hip, happening and cool (or so the director's mother says). That doesn't apply just to movies. I try and stay up-to-date on plenty. That's why I find myself reading lots of different sources for news. Maybe I'm expanding my bubble.

Whether I am trying to burst my bubble or procrastinate from, well... just about anything, I do touch in to different things. Don't worry, this is where it comes back to movies. While a quick look at Rotten Tomatoes is good to get the overall feel of a movie based in the reviews of plenty of critics, some people do better with finding a critic with whom they share an affinity (for David Hasselhoff, perhaps) and listening to them. Well, I can't say that I've necessarily found that "perfect critic". Seems like an oxymoron anyway. What I have found is the most interesting approach to reviews I've seen in a long time. No, they haven't replaced the tried-and-true "thumbs up" or "thumbs down". Instead they go into greater detail than I've seen before. Now maybe I should've seen this coming based on the source but I have a tendency not to see obvious things coming sometimes. In this case, the source is the Christian Science Monitor. Not considering myself particularly Christian, I could have immediately considered such a publication out of my area of interest. But the CS Monitor is widely read and widely respected. While I have read a number of their articles, I had not ever seen their movie reviews, that is, until today. This is where it falls more in line with what I might have expected from a publication called the Christian Science Monitor (this is not a judgment, just recognition). Listing the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) rating isn't enough in the case of many of their reviews. They go all out:

Sex/Nudity: 18 scenes, including frank talk about sex, graphic depiction of sexual activity, and full-frontal male nudity. Violence: 3 comic scenes. Profanity: 42 harsh profanities. Drugs/Alcohol/Tobacco: 4 scenes with drinking.

Think you can figure out that one? What about:

Sex/Nudity: 4 instances of innuendo. Violence: 6 scenes. Profanity: 24 mild expressions. Drugs/Alcohol/Tobacco: 2 instances of drinking.

I dunno, I might be inclined to watch the movies just to try to add them all up. Not tonight though. Good luck figuring it out.

2 comments:

kendra said...

I try to go by what people tell me about movies, as well as reading a few reviews. If I could care less about the opinion of others, I'll go anyway.

I'd much rather go to a movie where I have a low expectation and be WOWED, than to go to a movie I'm really looking forward to, and be disappointed.

justin said...

Ahhh, the joys of low expectations. As long as it doesn't influence people's take on life, I'm all for it. Nobody should have low expectations in life (but it is damn handy for movies).