…if you can read the source at all. When it’s from a known, reputable reviewer, the source is printed as big, or sometimes even bigger than the actual blurb. When it’s from “The Bumfuck Gazette,” the print is so small it’s basically just a squiggly line.
Speaking of which - didn’t there used to be some reviewer (Ron something?) from something called “Urban News”? He used to be quoted all of the time - he just LOVED every bomb that hit the screen and was often the only good review ever to be printed about lots of really horrible films. I think eventually it became a joke if he liked any film.
Are you thinking perhaps of “David Manning”?
He was certainly a classic legend too, but no…I can’t find the guy on Google, but in the 70’s (?) or later, it got to be a joke whenever this guy would rave about a film. I thought his first name was “Ron” and seem to recall he was a black dude and not sure if it was Urban News or Urban Radio or Urban New Radio or whatever, but they would always splash his “rave” review on some turkey and pretend he was a serious critic.
Not quite what you were looking for, but Spy Magazine had a joke reviewer who would lavish praise on the worst cinematic dreck. Not full reviews, just a line suitable for an ad – usually cleverly implying the film or actor was guaranteed to win an Oscar.
Found him!
Ron Brewington…here is a link with an interesting article. Starts talking about Ron in paragraph four.
Ha! David Manning is mentioned in the sidebar when I pull up that page, to boot!
I would agree that words like " heartwarming" or “life affirming” are a bad sign, unless life affirming means the protagonist survived a couple car chases and three explosions.
When the the movie’s title, or somesuch (e.g., “now playing”), is displayed in the above-below black bars for TV advertising, I know to avoid it.
Bullitt and The Seven-Ups were also great movies with great car chase scenes. I think the important difference is these were already great movies without the car chase scenes. But some movies have nothing deeper than their car chase scenes. It’s like the difference between a great movie with a hot sex scene and a porn movie that’s nothing but sex scenes.
I wonder how much they paid for that regenerating hub cap option on that Stang in Bullitt.
That’s the one I meant. Runaway Train. I’m totally shocked he was in Midnight Express.
Using a blurb from Larry King was always a very bad sign. The guy was notorious for shilling stuff. Fortunately, doesn’t happen so often anymore. But anyone of that ilk: a non-critic looking to please guests on his show.
Another good movie with car chases: Drive (2011).
There are just certain actors and director who you know will mean the film is automatically rubbish. Some of these have pretty much consistently acted in/directed awful films (e.g. Paris Hilton, Uwe Boll), some of them (M. Night Shyamalan, Sylvester Stallone have made some very good films, but have then become consistently awful).
Can we add “coming of age” to the list of adjectives like “heartwarming?”
At what point does the Springtime for Hitler effect occur?
That could be a danger. :dubious:
Almost immediately. The problem is the effect wears off after a few minutes. Which is another way to tell if a movie sucks: if it’s a feature length movie based on an idea that’s only funny for about the first five minutes.
This rule explains the general suckitude of SNL movies.
And James Remar is the guy who is not James Rebhorn.
“Directed by Michael Bay; Screenplay by M. Night Shyamalan, Vaguely Based on a Book by Phillip K. Dick, Music by The Bay City Rollers, Starring Nicolas Cage, featuring a Very Special Performance by Whoopi Goldberg.”
When the ads give away key plot points. Example, Rocky and Bullwinkle. Without ever seeing the movie, or even hearing anyone talk about it, you find out that it’s a really big deal when Rocky is able to fly in the real world.