Lamb chops

All the big bloggers are all over the politics of why the “what’s so funny ’bout peace, love and understanding” moving pictures are bleeding money. But for me, it’s about the art, see?

No, not the art of movies. I haven’t been in a movie theater in over a decade. No, I mean the art of murderous movie reviewing! For example, Dana Stevens reviewed “Lions for Lambs,” the latest anti-Iraq-war agitprop from Hollywood in Slate. Well of course I’m rooting against it — butLions for Lambs poster I root against just about every movie, not just because I think Hollywood is destroying this country and has become America’s calling card of moral decline around the globe. Nope — it’s because I love well written bomb reviews (yet another reason to mourn the unexplainable shift of Frank Rich, once known as the “Butcher of Broadway,” to the New York Times‘s opinionatin’ pages). Well, I wasn’t disappointed! Here are some greasy, tasty excerpts from Stevens’s review:

As you sit through the film’s 88 eternal minutes, you have to keep reminding yourself that Redford has been directing films, some of them pretty good, for nearly 30 years now. Yet Lions for Lambs appears to have been created by someone who’s never seen one of these newfangled contraptions called “movies,” or for that matter, witnessed that phenomenon known as “speech.”…

The net effect for the viewer is that of being trapped in an airless room, then escaping it to find yourself in another, and yet another….

Redford keeps cutting away to clocks as the professor’s office hour, the senator’s interview, and the soldiers’ hour of peril chug toward their respective ends. The unintended consequence is that you find yourself trying to match the real-time proceedings onscreen with the real time ticking away on your watch, and counting the seconds till you can go home.

Pass the mint jelly!

Cross-posted at Likelihood of Success.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend