Did you read the Empire review paul?
No. Got the new one, but I think I skipped the review. I was more on about their undying support and general sycophantism for Grant/Curtis.
my bad. They’ve been wrong in the past, although not that often.
I bet Heat magazine will have a real subjective dissertation on it though.
hmm, venting in a vacuum.
Promise me you don’t read Heat. Seriously – I’m squeezing back the trigger right now :).
It’s OK to say it’s your missus’s copy.
When I lived in England, and I was dating my future (now ex-) wife, it was a happy time. Now, that I’m stuck back in the States, and single and not dating, sometimes I think back on those days wistfully.
But then I remember. I don’t have to be dragged to go see another effing British romantic comedy starring Hugh effing Grant ever again! And it makes me feel so much happier.
But CanvasShoes, hating movies is fun! Cynicism is already prevalent in our society, so why not direct it at the entertainment industry? If we didn’t go to movies at all, we might be car bombing politicians or something. Plus, nobody can express spite and vitriol better than the British. Let them continue!
shrug
I liked it. Alan Rickman, Liam Neeson, and Colin Firth…mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. I don’t even remember the details of the movie, I just remember those three and mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Its neither mine nor my missusus. Heat deserves its own pitting in a seperate thread. I was merely being sarcastic about its reviews of films and ting. Got a Z-list ‘celeb’ in your film? 5 stars!
fuckers.
and I’m quite enthusiastic about good film. endless discussion picking stuff apart isn’t really what I’m after.
Giving this type of film and Hugh Grant is though. Predictable. See jjimm? didnt need to ever watch it. zebra’s sorted out exactly what I had already guessed. A confused mediocre mess.
I know, that was sorta harsh. It’s sort of a pet peeve of mine. I just, every once in a while get so annoyed at the “oh, I’m so hip, cool, and cynical that movies are just beneath me” attitude that seems to just absolutely rule in this day and age regarding any halfway popular movie.
It’s almost as if, as soon as a movie has proven itself popular among enough people (based on sales, or word of mouth, etc), the critics come out of the woodwork. Makes me wonder, what DO you people want? I mean, what would it take for a poor movie to get a mere “it was okay” rather than a burial from you? (collective you).
There are no greys here, it’s all black and white. Well, actually mostly black from what I see. As I said, the movies aren’t just so-so, or okay. They go to great lengths to complain about how they’re the worst scourge of hollywood since Elvis movies or something.
Sorry, end hijack (sheepish smile).
Heat film reviews are terrible. Brit romcom with Hugh Grant? Five stars. Bit gritty, bit depressing but good? Four stars.
Still like the rest of the magazine, though.
In an attempt to make one post even sadder than Brutus’:
Weren’t they supposed to be SAS? If so, the SAS just love their Heckler & Koch toys. I think they even use M16/M203 combos in the field rather than the frankly poor SA80.
Love actually made me cry; cry when I realized I’d wasted £5 to see such godawful shite HAHAHAHA!*
*I haven’t actually seen it and it’s not on general release in the UK 'til Friday
Wait, Alan Rickman is in this?
The only Hugh Grant movie that I’ll actually watch is Sense and Sensibility and that has more to do with Rickman, Thompson, and Winslet. Hugh Grant spent the whole movie looking as if he left the hanger in his shirt.
kicks Hugh Grant in the shins YOU SUCK!
What the hell is going on in this paragraph?!
Rotten Tomatoes has it at 69%, which is fresh (though just barely). Are reviewers really that crazy?
I don’t know about “crazy”. I don’t think that they have the “be all and end all” where taste in entertainment is concerned. But, I know that I usually tend (except where Disney is concerned) to follow the opposite of what they say, and end up avoiding the crappy movies and seeing the good ones.
Okay. I’m in love with you now. And I need to get the diet pepsi off my monitor. 
I don’t know–the last movie I saw Hugh Grant and Alan Rickman together in was An Awfully Big Adventure, which is by far the worst movie I’ve ever paid money to see.
But hey, I’m always up for a good British romantic comedy, so long as the only alternative is spending the evening slamming my testicles in a car door.
Dr. J
And people laugh at me when I say that the English speak a different language.
I’ve gone through that paragraph a few times, and although I think I sort of grasp that it has something to do with some actress from Eastenders, the rest of it reads like the author’s been possessed.
I’m going to see it, reviews aside, because I will see anything if it has Alan Rickman in it. I’m so weak.
About A Boy is actually a good movie, but that’s because it is based on a novel by Nick Hornby, the man who also wrote High Fidelity. Doesn’t feel anything like the other Hugh Grant movies, and that’s a good thing.
I’m more interested in the sexless curio sometimes known as ‘that bird wot was in EastEnders’. Is Martine McCrutchLunch up to the job as Hugh tossled-haired Grants bit of rough, or do we always have half an eye on the door of Number Ten expecting a confused RRRIIICCKKYYYYYYYYYYY to wander in from the (yet still) ablaze car lot ??
TRANS.
“Is the actress Martine McCutcheon, who appears in this film, any good as Grant’s love interest, or is she just recycling her TV soap performances?”