The Critics Agree!!!

"Outrageously funny!" ---Paul Wunder, on Flubber.

"A Stylish thriller! Powerfully intense, one of the years best films!" ---Ron Brewington, on The Jackal.

"A timely, pulse-pounding 8 out of 10" ---Susan Granger, on The Peacemaker.

"WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL" ---Jim Svedja, on Fools Rush In.

It does not take any sort of deductive, logical thinking person to realize that whenever a motion picture's advertisement sports accolades sprawled by one or more of the folks above, that the picture will probably be crap. Flubber, The Jackal, The Peacemaker, and Fools Rush In were all major flops critically, and yet who would know from such glorious comments? Yes, these are very bad movies, and it is not that these four non-critical critics only like bad movies, they seemingly like every movie. Thus, if you are the director of, say, a film such as "Red Corner" or "Mouse Hunt", and it has come time for you to produce an ad that will appeal to the general public, what do you do but turn to one of them. It is a practice that has gone on for numerous years, and as long as there are types of people who enjoy sitcoms and talk shows, there will be people who will fall for this gag.

Madge: Honey! Look! The critics agree that Sequel 2 is the blow up movie of the year!!!"

Frank: Gee Madge! Those are sure good marks! Let me grab my topcoat, and we will giddy-up on down to the local cinema, and see Sequel 2, and maybe we can get some popped-corn!

While Madge and Frank might find Sequel 2 semi-tolerable, as they are dull-minded folk, others will hate it. Hate it with a passion that can only be rivaled by my dislike for the phrase "Raise the roof", accompanied by that silly, arms in air motion. This practice definitely raises ethical questions in my mind. Surely these promoters know what they are doing. They must know that the "agreeing critics", as we shall call them, like everything, and plastering these rave reviews of theirs across newspaper ad headings add nothing to their silly films. It does, however, get worse. I have seen what follows three times, most recently on the television spot for the film which pushes the limits of mediocrity, "Scream 2". This really has to be seen to be fully appreciated, but hopefully you'll get the jest of it. After a brief intro, three blurbs quickly flash across the screen: "Twice as scary as the first..", and then two more quotes, slightly different in context and shown as if they were from different critics. But no! They are all three from Mr. Wunder, and while it seems as if this film has just received three rave review blurbs from three different critics, careful inspection reveals that they are all from good old Paul. Trust me, I really, really chortled when I saw this. It was beautiful.

Wunder is kind of like Anthony Michael Hall was in "Sixteen Candles": The leader of the dweebs. Wunder's web site is laugh-a-minute fun, do check it out sometime (www.pwunder.com). His intro to the site is verbatim, as follows: "These are reviews of movies that will not open for some time. It is my purpose to bring you the first news about new and unusual motion pictures. If this were strictly a REVIEW site, you would find both positive and negative reviews. However, this is a site that will bring you your first look at some of my up-and-coming favorites. Thus, reviews found here will always be positive in one way or another. ENJOY!"

So, to my knowledge, Wunder truly does like everything that he sees. Some of the films included on his site, chock full of reviews positive in one way or another, are: Mimic (seriously), The Fifth Element (Ohhhh I hated that film), The game (silly, silly, silly) and The Lost World (I like to call it The lost gray-cells). The fact that these films are included in a list of tolerable movies is bad enough, however Wunder adds to the gut-wrenching pain with a writing style ALL his own. There is much more to it than Paul's love affair with the exclamation point, which he uses is seemingly every sentence. There are silly comments, and just heaps of improper grammar. Take this excerpt from his Fifth Element review, commenting on Milla Jovovich's "Wonderful!!!" performance: "….she has indeed a future as a fine actor." For starters, Paul, no this Kuff's vet indeed has not future as a fine actor, and secondly Paul, where is your exclamation point!! This film that I hated more than the phrase "show me the money", Wunder went on to hail as possibly better than Bladerunner. Whoa! Something else that I found quite funny, in a tangent that could be rivaled by me right now going into a discussion on the advantages of cooking with cilantro, Wunder states that he found it very "neat" that there were so many African-Americans in key roles in The Fifth Element. Hee-Hee!

The Dangerously sexy/poor acting Milla Jovovich.

Ron Brewington of the (fictitious?) American Urban Radio Network, recently had a blurb on alleged film Free Willy 3 ,"A real treat for the entire family". I have seen a lot of Brewington in the papers and on commercials lately, as apparently the film companies have made him their favorite film lover as of late. Willy 3 reeked of Granger danger when I first heard it was coming out, but when I checked the paper, Ron had taken the honor, perhaps because the sneaky think-tanks Warner Bros. know to rotate the four a bit, as to keep the less observant element, well, less observant.

Susan Granger, Film Critic/PTA Mom, who recently hailed The Peacemaker as "…a timely, pulse-pounding 8 out of 10!", timely perhaps in that it came out on the same day that the equally entertaining "Battle of the sexes on ice" debuted on FOX. To complement her review of the dreadful Peacemaker, her video pick of the week was "The Lost World" which seems to be the choice flick of the four. The Lost World was a really, really horrible motion picture.

Susan Granger, in action

While I imagine we will continue to see this practice, as our society continues to be filled with gullible, uneducated sorts, one thing we will never see is one of the agreeing critics' raves parlayed with one by Roger Ebert or other decent critics. Promoters know, that if Ebert approves of their film, then resorting to a Granger blurb would be totally foolish, just as restaurateurs know not to serve Ramen noodles with lobster. Actually, I have seen something close recently. The day before "As Good As It Gets" came out, there was a Wunder blurb. The next day, an Ebert blurb, and several other blurbs by reputable critics replaced it. All I can imagine is that there was a serious deadline, and the promoter knew he could get a Wunder blurb, or, he was playing a funny prank. I have not seen this film yet, I hear it is pretty good, but it is still scarred for life.

One last thing I wonder about these squirrels is that are their tastes in other things similar to their tastes in film? For example, could I kick Mr. Brewington in the jimmy and of it, would he write, "…his kicking me in the balls was a thrill-a-minute, romp-stomping good time!!!" and if Granger sampled some of my cat's used litter, would she scroll "…gosh, what did that little kitty eat for dinner, I must recommend sampling her stool to everyone out there!!!". Sure it is good to be positive, I will not argue that with anyone. However, I imagine that upon a viewing of the Wunder approved Mimic, Zig Ziglar would see fit only to slit his wrists open and lay down dead, after viewing two hours of large bugs wrestling with Mira Sorvino.