Pageviews past week

Tuesday, November 26, 2013


I just wanted to say, I went into this movie expecting some negative results. I did no get them. I was expecting this movie to be a disaster. It was not. It wasn’t a home run either mind you. It just wasn’t the epic disaster I thought it was going to be. Keep I mind this is a true DVD review. I’m writing it in 2010 and have seen I believe all or most of Steven Spielberg’s films up to this date. I am even considering getting HBO to catch his new mini series with Tom Hanks. We know Mr. Spielberg can do horror. (See Jaws.) We know he can do Sci Fi. (See E.T.) We definitly know he can do action/adventure. (See Raiders of the Lost Arc.) Hell he was even good as drama. (See Schindler’s List.) In this movie he attempted his hand at comedy. He did so, with no so spectacular results. In comparison with the aforementioned titles he bombed. It is funny that I should use the word bomb, cosidering that this is what this movie was about. It was a comedy about some small California town after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. I personally found the film to be mostly funny, it just wasn’t up to Mr. Spielberg’s usual standards. The score seemed dry and unoriginal. I’m sure I’ve heard it some where before. Not that that is a shock with a John Williams score. It is just in this case that it seemed stolen. Mr. Williams usually does a better job of covering his tracks. This movie did have a great cast however. Including Ned Beatty, Dan Aykroyd, and John Belushi. With such a cast you would expect a greater result. Sorry some times too many cooks spoil the broth as was true with this endeavor. The movie was funny mind you it just wasn’t fall in your seat hilarious. This is for the most part a good flick. It has potential to be better. I think Mr. Spielberg should try his hand at comedy again. This movie was not as bad as the critics made it out to be. I for the most part liked it. I just thought it dragged on for nearly two and a half hours (2:26 to be exact.) They definitely could have edited it better. Grade B-

No comments:

A note from an editor!

Hi Matthew,

Thank you for the time and effort you put into this piece, especially on a Saturday morning. I can tell you definitely took good notes of everything that was going on during the event!

We still have some work to do before this piece is ready to print. Your piece has a lot of information, but it doesn’t sound like a news article. What was the point of his speech/presentation? Why was he addressing this audience? What is Vanguard? What does the company do – who does it serve? You spend a lot of time narrating (for example, how he was injured), but did not report on the purpose of the event. You can maybe mention his appearance/joking about it in a sentence or two, but do not take several paragraphs to do so. Also, I like how you mentioned where the name “Vanguard” comes from.

There are a lot of spelling errors in this piece – make sure you proof read each sentence carefully.

I know I am getting back to you a little later I hoped, and I’m sorry about that! But if you have time tonight, please go through my suggestions and try to rework your piece. You can send me what you have tonight/tomorrow morning. Please bring a copy of it to the meeting tomorrow and we will discuss it further from there.

Once again, thanks for your hard work and promptness! Remember this is a learning process, and we are all part of the Waltonian team!

Talk to you soon!

Ten Most pathetic movie stars that still have careers.

(In A - B -C Order)

1. Hayden Christensen

2. Tom Crusie

3. Kevin Costner

4. Keeanu Reeves

5. Denise Richards

6. Adam Sandler

7. Arnold Schwarzenegger

8. William Shatner

9. Sylvester Stalloan

10. John Claude Van dahm