missing text image: sites/all/themes/obs_2007/img/reply.gif
Dilbert (not verified) says:
It's kinda hard to know where to begin with this review. This movie was universally panned -- you're the lone voice in the wilderness, embracing the latest "Ishtar" or "Heaven's Gate" or "Showgirls." Good going! But the review itself is terrible. Your penultimate (and longest)paragraph has nothing to do with the movie itself -- it's just your love letter to Pacino, who apparently could appear in a snuff film and receive a positive review from you. And then you divulge a key plot point, spoiling the movie for those few people who might actually want to see this piece of garbage. I've been reading a lot about how newspapers are downsizing their staffs of reviewers, and until I read your review, I thought it was deplorable. Now I'm not so sure.
It's kinda hard to know where to begin with this review. This movie was universally panned -- you're the lone voice in the wilderness, embracing the latest "Ishtar" or "Heaven's Gate" or "Showgirls." Good going! But the review itself is terrible. Your penultimate (and longest)paragraph has nothing to do with the movie itself -- it's just your love letter to Pacino, who apparently could appear in a snuff film and receive a positive review from you. And then you divulge a key plot point, spoiling the movie for those few people who might actually want to see this piece of garbage. I've been reading a lot about how newspapers are downsizing their staffs of reviewers, and until I read your review, I thought it was deplorable. Now I'm not so sure.