A Review of a Review
I wrote this at work, in responce to a terrible review of "Eragon", it is currently on the New York Times Movie forum.
Review- http://movies2.nytimes.com/2006/12/15/movies/15erag.html?ref=movies
Forum, you'll probubly need to register- http://forums.nytimes.com/top/opinion/readersopinions/forums/arts/movies/index.html?offset=13984
A Review only Galbatorix would enjoy
Jeannette Catsoulis' review of "Eragon" is an unprofessional and short-sighted attempt at being witty, and it fails at even that.
First off she starts the review off to a terrible start; commenting on Christopher Paolini being a teenager. Paolini is a great author, and the fact that he was a teenager when he wrote "Eragon", the book, and gains the appeal he did makes him an even better writer. The comparison to Tim Allen manager was just a sorry attempt to be witty, and fails to be vary effective. The comment on Saphira's color is an amateurish thought; she is sapphire blue because that's how Paolini describes her, and they do a pretty good job at getting it right. It would also be nice if Catoulis had used Sphira's name, or any one else’s for that matter; it just takes a look at the New York Times description of the movie to find those names.
In the second paragraph she makes another attempt to be witty in the first line. Stefen Fangmeier's names has nothing to do with the movie, and such a comment reminds me more of immature, snickering, little children then respectable movie critics. Commenting on the "lineup" is pointless in this case, since "Eragon" is based on a book, and the plot is already pretty much set. Furthermore, Durza far from a wizard, any one who has read the books would know that, and when you're trying to say a spell with feeling, without being heard, you would sound like "a nicotine-stained graveyard."
Homosexual innuendo should be left to angsty high school students, unless it in in a serious manner. Also, comparing "Eragon" to "Lord of the Rings" is unfair; Paolini is not the author J.R.R. Tolkin was, and I'm sure "Eragon" does not have even close to the same budget as "Lord of the Rings."
I'm sorry if this review, of the review, was long winded, but this review got on my nerves. I’m also sorry for anyone who sat and read Catsoulis' review, including myself. I have not seen "Eragon" yet, so I don't have a full opinion of it, but it looks like it could be good. I have lost a little respect for The Times by reading this review, and I hope I don't lose any more.
Yes, my responce is longer then the review, 384 words in fact. I brillint use of my time I must say.
Review- http://movies2.nytimes.com/2006/12/15/movies/15erag.html?ref=movies
Forum, you'll probubly need to register- http://forums.nytimes.com/top/opinion/readersopinions/forums/arts/movies/index.html?offset=13984
A Review only Galbatorix would enjoy
Jeannette Catsoulis' review of "Eragon" is an unprofessional and short-sighted attempt at being witty, and it fails at even that.
First off she starts the review off to a terrible start; commenting on Christopher Paolini being a teenager. Paolini is a great author, and the fact that he was a teenager when he wrote "Eragon", the book, and gains the appeal he did makes him an even better writer. The comparison to Tim Allen manager was just a sorry attempt to be witty, and fails to be vary effective. The comment on Saphira's color is an amateurish thought; she is sapphire blue because that's how Paolini describes her, and they do a pretty good job at getting it right. It would also be nice if Catoulis had used Sphira's name, or any one else’s for that matter; it just takes a look at the New York Times description of the movie to find those names.
In the second paragraph she makes another attempt to be witty in the first line. Stefen Fangmeier's names has nothing to do with the movie, and such a comment reminds me more of immature, snickering, little children then respectable movie critics. Commenting on the "lineup" is pointless in this case, since "Eragon" is based on a book, and the plot is already pretty much set. Furthermore, Durza far from a wizard, any one who has read the books would know that, and when you're trying to say a spell with feeling, without being heard, you would sound like "a nicotine-stained graveyard."
Homosexual innuendo should be left to angsty high school students, unless it in in a serious manner. Also, comparing "Eragon" to "Lord of the Rings" is unfair; Paolini is not the author J.R.R. Tolkin was, and I'm sure "Eragon" does not have even close to the same budget as "Lord of the Rings."
I'm sorry if this review, of the review, was long winded, but this review got on my nerves. I’m also sorry for anyone who sat and read Catsoulis' review, including myself. I have not seen "Eragon" yet, so I don't have a full opinion of it, but it looks like it could be good. I have lost a little respect for The Times by reading this review, and I hope I don't lose any more.
Yes, my responce is longer then the review, 384 words in fact. I brillint use of my time I must say.