Wednesday, June 01, 2005

Reason #4853 I think ratings are simpleminded horsehooey that I will only deal with when a publisher demands it: I'm at the bar and after the game ROCKY III comes on and I'm like WOO because this movie has Hulk Hogan as Thunderlips, Burt Young in a performance W.C. Fields would tip his hat at, and MR. T suggesting that TALIA SHIRE get with him if she wants a real man, inspiring SYLVESTER STALLONE to throw a defensive, paranoid fit while BURGESS MEREDITH cantankers and foreshadows a heart attack. Then I realize that back when I was tossing numeric scores around this site back in day (they're in the archive, maybe I'll get embarassed enough to chuck them someday soon), I gave Rocky III two stars because it petered out, had a bullshit ending (so like Rocky is a sell-out at the beginning but because he gets JUST ENOUGH "tiger" from Black Dude Apollo he's allowed to beat the Best Boxer Out There Clubber, who is working for selfish and hateful rather than All-American reasons) and all kinds of system-supporting nonsense. While that's all well and good, surely a movie that has THUNDERLIPS et al deserves more than two stars, right? And then I remember how idiotic this whole 'stars' nonsense is.

Despite this antipathy, you will see reviews of mine with ratings attached. I don't feel strongly enough about this to deny myself the platforms. I just won't answer mail that notes: "SURELY indie band xyz deserves a 7.9 rather than a 6.5!"

Btw, I hope Cinderella Man fails miserably.

No comments: