I love how the Universal spokesthing slobbers on and on about Adam Sandler. “He’s a star…we’re by far the number 1 film.” She sounds a lot like RNC chair Tom Reynolds the morning after the 2004 “elections.”
“critics trashed it, but fans are loyal”
Of course they are–what ELSE can they watch that they would understand?
Adam Sandler has always had pro gay characters in many of his movies. They are always treated as, “They are gay, so what?” and are never made fun of for being gay. He makes comedies that appeal to the beer and fart and jockstrap crowd, with a pro gay message in it.
His comedies might not appeal to me, (I did like Big Daddy, which is about the only one I saw) but I give him props for taking a risk by putting such messages of tolerance in them.
I would have given them props, too, if I hadn’t read yesterday on IMDB.com that a kiss between the two characters was left on the cutting room floor. Now, that may not seem like such a big deal, but if the director thought it was important enough to include in the first place, it begs the question, what motivated them to take it out ?
That’s my biggest issue with the movie. It looks like the standard, lets pull a scam (for all the right reasons, mind you) and then the comedy comes from the inablity for them to hold to the act they concocked. (he he he, I did that on purpose).
I mean how trite can you get?
As for a kiss ending up on the floor, eh, I don’t want to see that kind of mashing going on.
I wasn’t exactly going to jerk off to it myself, but the joke this time does seem to be ON us rather than WITH us…but since Hollywood’s thrown us its paltry crumb with “Brokeback Mountain,” I guess it no longer has to reflect our lives accurately except in indies…and even then, only as fashion designers or caterers.
I think that I’ll reserve any opinion on the joke being on or with us, since I haven’t seen the movie, nor do I intend too, so I would feel ignorant making such an opinion.
Point taken…but these films all seem to follow a formula, and past experience has left me burned. I’ll just rest on my assumptions, ignorant or not, since their box office isn’t going to depend on me anyway. (The fact that the frat boys are flocking to see it is proof enough for me, I guess–either it’s mean-spirited enough to appeal to them, or they’ve suddenly become enlightened. I’m too jaded to believe in the latter, unfortunately. Guess I need three ghosts to visit me in the night.)
I love how the Universal spokesthing slobbers on and on about Adam Sandler. “He’s a star…we’re by far the number 1 film.” She sounds a lot like RNC chair Tom Reynolds the morning after the 2004 “elections.”
“critics trashed it, but fans are loyal”
Of course they are–what ELSE can they watch that they would understand?
Adam Sandler has always had pro gay characters in many of his movies. They are always treated as, “They are gay, so what?” and are never made fun of for being gay. He makes comedies that appeal to the beer and fart and jockstrap crowd, with a pro gay message in it.
His comedies might not appeal to me, (I did like Big Daddy, which is about the only one I saw) but I give him props for taking a risk by putting such messages of tolerance in them.
I would have given them props, too, if I hadn’t read yesterday on IMDB.com that a kiss between the two characters was left on the cutting room floor. Now, that may not seem like such a big deal, but if the director thought it was important enough to include in the first place, it begs the question, what motivated them to take it out ?
Yeah, I’m not saying Mr. Sandler is intolerant or not cool. He’s just in stupid movies most of the time.
That’s my biggest issue with the movie. It looks like the standard, lets pull a scam (for all the right reasons, mind you) and then the comedy comes from the inablity for them to hold to the act they concocked. (he he he, I did that on purpose).
I mean how trite can you get?
As for a kiss ending up on the floor, eh, I don’t want to see that kind of mashing going on.
I wasn’t exactly going to jerk off to it myself, but the joke this time does seem to be ON us rather than WITH us…but since Hollywood’s thrown us its paltry crumb with “Brokeback Mountain,” I guess it no longer has to reflect our lives accurately except in indies…and even then, only as fashion designers or caterers.
I think that I’ll reserve any opinion on the joke being on or with us, since I haven’t seen the movie, nor do I intend too, so I would feel ignorant making such an opinion.
Point taken…but these films all seem to follow a formula, and past experience has left me burned. I’ll just rest on my assumptions, ignorant or not, since their box office isn’t going to depend on me anyway. (The fact that the frat boys are flocking to see it is proof enough for me, I guess–either it’s mean-spirited enough to appeal to them, or they’ve suddenly become enlightened. I’m too jaded to believe in the latter, unfortunately. Guess I need three ghosts to visit me in the night.)
ooOOOOoooOOOOOoooOOOOoo
AarooOOOOooOOOn!
Mend your ways!
They also screened the movie for GLAAD, who gave it thier approval before it was released.
Well, I suppose if GLAAD approves, then it must be OK…I must have misunderstood the fragments that I saw. GLAAD is very strict!
That means I really AM just an old crab! Oh my God, what next?!
Oh Aaron! There is still hope!
GLAAD is bullshit. Means nothing.
Oh David! There is no hope!
Approved or no, it looks like a piece of crap. It’ll be on DVD by Christmas.
I agree with that Edwardo.
Oh Tim! There is no hope!
Sure there is…I’ll send the ghosts to your house.
Are the Ghosts hot? Cause if they aren’t, don’t bother….
They were when I got done with them!