It’s kind of par for the course with these little video capsule things they do. Scott is a guy I don’t mind reading, but I’d be perfectly happy never watching him in one of these again. I try not to watch these, anyway, because they are inherently lame.
As Bobby hints at, it seems like the newspaper business is trying to force writers into the blog, podcast, and video era. It doesn’t work for a lot of them. The “talent” and the writing combined, in this case, add up to nothing worthwhile.
It comes off as lame Michael Medved-esque, when it could have been so much more. I expected more unique insight and point-of-view from the NYT. What, no interviews with the film makers?
That was positively brimming with incontrovertible and largely uninteresting conventional wisdom. I suppose for the 5 people who have neither seen nor heard of This is Spinal Tap then it serves some purpose. Otherwise, yawn.
It’s kind of par for the course with these little video capsule things they do. Scott is a guy I don’t mind reading, but I’d be perfectly happy never watching him in one of these again. I try not to watch these, anyway, because they are inherently lame.
As Bobby hints at, it seems like the newspaper business is trying to force writers into the blog, podcast, and video era. It doesn’t work for a lot of them. The “talent” and the writing combined, in this case, add up to nothing worthwhile.
AO Scott’s review goes to 3.
Comment of the Month contender!
It comes off as lame Michael Medved-esque, when it could have been so much more. I expected more unique insight and point-of-view from the NYT. What, no interviews with the film makers?
That was positively brimming with incontrovertible and largely uninteresting conventional wisdom. I suppose for the 5 people who have neither seen nor heard of This is Spinal Tap then it serves some purpose. Otherwise, yawn.
Nice one!