http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2002-2006 by the authors Sat, 15 Jul 2006 02:12:25 EDT http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/12/193705.php#comment-407913 Giving away the story is a much more serious sin. Reviewers do it all the time, albeit sometimes in subtle ways. "a lighthearted ending that seemed too simple" (it's going to end the way you think it will halfway through) "makes you think about the way film tells stories" (contains a deceptive dream sequence) "characters appear and wander off at random" (the killer is someone we don't meet until the end) "far too reminiscent of X" (same plot as X) "a tired sequel" (same plot as the original) ]]> 407913@blogcritics.org Sat, 15 Jul 2006 02:12:25 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/12/193705.php#comment-406781 Lane is one of a handful of film critics whose reviews are worth reading (rather than scanning) all the way through. ]]> 406781@blogcritics.org Thu, 13 Jul 2006 03:44:48 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/12/193705.php#comment-406739 Whew! Glad to know that I haven't made any mistakes like that. Hey...wait a minute...oh bugger! ]]> 406739@blogcritics.org Thu, 13 Jul 2006 01:13:38 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/12/193705.php#comment-406649 I guess he must impress people - after all, the New Yorker obviously likes him... :-) ]]> 406649@blogcritics.org Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:01:51 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/12/193705.php#comment-406647 This is one school of thought! ]]> 406647@blogcritics.org Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:00:03 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/12/193705.php#comment-406645 Good article, dude. But does anyone actually hold Anthony Lane in high esteem? I always thought he was more a punchline than a critic. ]]> 406645@blogcritics.org Wed, 12 Jul 2006 20:58:16 EDT