chediski's Movie Ratings - Rotten Tomatoes

Movie Ratings and Reviews

Crazy Heart
Crazy Heart(2009)

Wow - what a snooze fest. Plenty of fine performsnces and "nicey-nicey" scenes and moments, but a big "so what" by the end.

Did You Hear About the Morgans?

Could stand about 40 minutes of it and then left. Parker is just hideous. Her acting is always the same in every film, her horse face is getting longer, her teenie eyes are weird and her hands and nails belong to a construction worker. What a horrible casting decision. Grant just shows her up everytime they're together. And the character she plays deserves to get shot anyway. Really jr. high school lame stuff.

Julie & Julia

Did anyone else notice the small model of the U.S.S. Enterprise sitting on the bottom left hand corner of the movie screen during one of Julie's blogging sessions? Is she a Trek fan or something?


Wow - talk about the Emperor wearing no clothes. It's not hard to come up with ways to shock people. It's hard to do it intelligently and that takes forethought. Being that the "real" reactions cannot be predicted, any societal commentary are lucky reations from which to be edited. It certainly is not writing anymore than "reporters" for "The Daily Show" can take credit for the unpredictable answers that they get from duped guests. All Cohen can do is try to create a set-up that will hopfully invoke the maximum amount of shocked response from his victims. But mainly, Bruno as a character is so dislikable anyway you just have a 'who gives an f' reaction and the film is then about getting into the victims' reactions than Bruno himself. And the people who have been duped are not that interesting either.

Star Trek
Star Trek(2009)

Wow. Talk about silly. The writers know how to write character - to a degree - but the rest of the plot is ridiculous. There are too many dumb things to list with this script that has NOTHING to do with Star Trek storytelling but is just sloppy writing in general. Things that forgot to be fixed after a first draft. A score that was noisy with no direction. Dialog that contradicts the story. In short, it's really almost crappy because of these gaffes. I think Paramount when it comes to Star Trek films still thinks, "It's a Star Trek movie - don't sweat it being a good film. We'll still make money." This is reflected by the lazyness of the script. This was a very good story for 10-13 year olds. And it certainly lacked taught and dramatic direction. I think the Mission Impossible people treated Trek the way they did that. Action first, character second - and it was always character first that made the whole franchise so successful. Doesn't matter. Trek got screwed again by not allowing the experts actually write it. They know what they're doing - after all, they were the ones that kept it going for over 40 years.

Pink Panther 2

I think the nation's critics have gas or something. This is a comedy. I don't think they know what that means. I have a feeling most critics out there expect everything to be compared to "Hamlet." What one expects vs. what one gets and then complains about it - especially when they don't pay to see it - is pretty self-obnoxious.

This was a funny film. That's all it had to be. Funny. Period. Not a landmark film, not a testament to talent, just funny. And it is. As if none of the critics who killed this movie laughed is to say they were either sleeping, had a hangover from their alcoholic binges or had it in for Steve Martin. I thought the first one Martin did was funnier - but nonetheless there are a lot of funny bits in this if you pay close attention and given Martin's genius over the years with his writing and performing skills they should have paid closer attention.

Evidently the financial crisis has taken out any sense of humor from the souls of these critics. If you watch a comedy in a bad mood you'll hate it. Period.