Pageviews past week

Thursday, January 16, 2014

Rush Hour 3

In world of tired cliques, worn out plotlines and insulting stereotypes not to mention derogatory characterizations this movie reaches it’s acme. Which is ironically enough where I rented this DVD and waste of $1 as well as 91 minutes I could have been torturing cats. Torturing cats at least would of gotten me thrown in jail and I’d have gotten out of writing a review for this distastoius flick. Notice I said flick because if this movie were a booger I’d flick it at you in discuting protest. What protest do you say. I’d have to protest to whom this movie were an insult to Catholicism, the French police, the French government and more or less the entire country of France in general. There are more insuling streotypes I just don’t want to list them here. They ( The French) may be wanting to call French fries freedom fries after the see this piece of garbage. One French character was even an insult to the genre this movie belongs. You know better action films. As per the action. If you want to call it action. I was never stunned, shocked, thrilled, or for that part even entertained. The action sequences and so called chase sequences were unoriginal tired and worn out. In a word they were boring. I pray that such violet action be brought against the writers of this movie. I’m thinking a good explosion might be the only redeeming solution for this screenplay. The acting wasn’t all bad considering the source. I mean really Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker what’s up with that? I can’t believe they made 3 movies under this title. They should be forced to play in rush hour traffic after making this film. (Oh wait that’s exactly what Tucker’s character is doing at the start of this film how apropos.) I feel as if I were run over after watching this dreary dreadful thing. I give it an F for France, where the bulk of this movie takes place. I also give it an F for fuming and far fetched I was fuming after watching this far fetched film. Grade F

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