Reviewing the Movie Reviewers

One thang I’ve been noticing about movie reviewers in widely distributed periodicals is that they happily show-off what little they happen to know.  The most recent example of this is the review by J.M. in the Wall Street Journal.  He reviewed the Borne Supremacy.  He starts off with glowing statements about the movie.  Then he starts comparing it to the director’s previous movie, Bloody Sunday.  Bloody Sunday is a political film about how British Soldiers started shooting N. Irelanders.  So, J.M. compares a political docu-drama with a big budget action flick, simply because both are directed by the same person.  Huh?  So, I’m guessing that J.M. did see that little non-Hollywood film?  Or maybe he did just five minutes of research on the internet, found some reviews that said it was good and then decided to make his review another big-budget-soul-movies-have-no-soul article.  Is something wrong with a film just because it has a high budget and is from Hollywood?  Review the damn movie you are talking about, J.M.!  If you must compare, then pick movies from the same genre, and compare apples to apples. 

I can just imagine if J.M. was around when 2001: A Space Odyssey came out.  J.M. might say something like “Although this is a wonderful, technically accurate film, I find it is missing the creepiness Kubrick so cleverly weaved into the classic Lolita.  This is what happens when talent like Kubrick gets a big Hollywood budget.  I sure wish they made more movies about perverts instead of science fiction.  Kubrick has failed his fans.”  I just have one thang to say to you, J.M, “Get real.”