Knowing Number One Despite Bad Reviews

Know your critics!

Ok, let's talk film. Those of you who went to go see Knowing this weekend didn't pay attention to your tomatoemeter did you? Well, that's what you get when you ignore the tomatometer and take it on your own to see a film while ignoring the reviews. Now, I know what you all say. You all say "I don't care what the critics think!" But you have to. Don't you listen to stock market analysts before investing in the stock market? Wouldn't you listen to a house appraiser before buying a house? Granted the movies are a fraction of the cost of these things. Just take in this folling fact: movie critics are journalists who are paid to watch movies. They get paid to write down their professional opinion.
I have a critic that I jive with. Kevin Thomas of the LA Times thinks just like I do. I rely on him. Even though the tomatometer may say one thing, I look at Kevin Thomas and read what he thinks. I read just about every review he writes and he proves consistantly to think like I do. Still I look at the tomatometer. If it is low, I don't pay to see it. If it is high, I will gladly pay, no matter who is the star.
So if you don't have a reviewer that you jell with as I do, you should read and heed the tomatometer. Otherwise, you'll be stuck watching Knowing with Nicholas Cage and thinking to yourself that the money on that film should have been money spent towards the dollar menu at Mcdonalds. That's what I would have spent it on. Maybe a coffee at It's a Grind. I like that place.

From LA Times:

Amanda Seyfried's attempt to tackle some edgy theatrical material has been thwarted by scheduling issues. EW has learned that the actress, best known for her singing-and-dancing role in Mamma Mia, won't be starring in Zack Snyder's 1960s-set, R-rated action fantasy Sucker Punch for Warner Bros. Seyfried was offered the lead role of Baby Doll, a young woman who has been committed to an insane asylum and fantasizes about escaping with the help of her fellow inmates. But with shooting scheduled for the fall, HBO won't release her from her Big Love commitment, which will be in the middle of filming its fourth season. No word yet on who Snyder will find as her replacement.

I think this goes into the great contract withholding stories of all time. Well maybe not, but you can look at it that way. Tom Selleck could not be Indiana Jones because of Magnum PI. Pierce Brosnan could not be James Bond at first because of Remington Steele. This could fall into that category cause Zack Snyder is now an A list director. Not that Watchmen was a monument of great storytelling, but it made money. 300 was pretty good. No it wasn't a great great film. It was ok to pretty good. That made money. And that is all you need to wear the A list Belt.

Now I have mentioned this before but I don't think anyone believed me. Here is an article in Time magazine which has Spielberg and James Cameron telling us that the future as in this year will be 3D laden. Sure you had a few films that tried to catch our 3D attention. Journey to the Center of the Earth did not do well. Bolt 3D made a small splash. As you know the 3D craze is dependent on movie theaters being equipped to handle the digital projection. Most theaters are not digital equipped. Movie studios have lent money to AMC and Edwards, but they have yet to conform. This is because the public, you yes you, is/are in denial of allowing 3D to become the fad it desperately wants to be.
We as a audience don't have favorable memories of 3D in theaters. In the 50's, it was campy and not well done. It gave people a headache. There were a few movies here and there like Jaws 3D in the 80's, but nothing took.
What we need to trust is that this technology is different than before. The best directors in Hollywood are 100% behind this new technology. I think we need to trust them and get excited about it. I am. Until later, let's talk film.