Tagged: movieline

This week in weird, unexpected media stories

This story over on Movieline caught my eye yesterday: “Where Was The Outrage For The Social Network’s Race-Blind Casting?” As I clicked the story open, I sighed a little bit, knowing it was probably some non-controversy ginned-up by Harvey Weinstein or something, just the latest in a neverending salvo of politicized Oscar-related attacks.

But…no. Nothing. The story was, in fact, not inspired by any new development. Nobody complained. Nobody protested. Nobody slipped anonymous quotes to entertainment reporters. It was seemingly just a blog post on the extremely timely subject matter of “two white Englishmen [cast] in the roles of a Brazilian and an Indian American. Folks got worked up into a lather over The Last Airbender this summer; so where’s the outrage now?”

That’s a fair question, wondering where the outage is now, when the controversy should be at its height. Except “The Social Network” opened on Oct. 1, and this story was posted on Jan. 9, meaning a whopping 100 days elapsed between the film’s release and this author deciding he was quite frankly fed up with people not complaining about this.

It is a very, very weird thing to read: in essence, it’s a rebuttal to a complaint that has yet to be lodged. Weird. I wonder if the author had some quota of posts they had to fill yesterday? In completely unrelated news, it gave me fodder for a post, so, kudos. [Movieline]

When movie sites hate movies a teensy bit less

Imagine my shock when I woke up this morning and checked the ol’ RSS reader and saw the following headline from Movieline:  “Come On, Get Happy: 5 Reasons to be Excited for the Next 8 Weeks.” On Movieline! And written by Christopher Rosen, the movie Web site writer who hates movies! Weird.

Rosen even notes that the impetus behind this out-of-place story was “Due Date” director Todd Phillips pointing out all of the overriding negativity on the site:

Thanks to Todd Phillips, there has been some chatter here at Movieline lately about our supposed less-than-positive tone. Far be it from me to speak for the rest of my brethren, but there is a big difference between going negative and being honest; that there’s overlap between those two is the natural order of the world.

Sure, he can’t help but offer snide asides (“supposed,” “a big difference between going negative and behind honest”). One wonders if one of Rosen’s superiors maybe pointed out to him that maybe he could not hate everything so goddamn much, just once in a while? Anyway, he points out things like “Harry Potter,” “Jeff Bridges” and “Conan, Letterman and Jon Stewart are all on TV,” so bully for him, he hates life a little less today. More to the point: Todd Phillips, your statements had an impact on Movieline’s editorial output. Who knew?

There are now three “Big Momma’s House” movies

Noted apostle of cinematic hatred Christopher Rosen…actually has a point on this one. There’s a third “Big Momma’s House”? Wow. Some eons hence, when aliens are picking through the ravaged remains of what was once human civilization, trying to pinpoint where things went wrong, they very well might settle on this trailer as the pivotal moment.

When movie sites hate movies

Movieline interviewed Todd Phillips recently while the director was promoting “Due Date.” He had this to say upon finding out the site interviewing him:

“…you guys just hate every movie. So it’s like, “Ugh, really, I have to do this and open myself up to some snarky, clever title?” You know what I mean? There are movie sites that love movies and there are movie sites that are just bitter people that just hate movies. I find Movieline to be in the latter. The tone is bizarrely hateful.”

Phillips is right! Kind of! Because apparently he only reads stuff written by Christopher Rosen, who seems to be Movieline’s go-to Johnny Bittergripes. Consider that today, Rosen penned a story with the following says-it-all headline: “Why Does Everyone Think Alfonso Cuarón’s Awful Harry Potter Adaptation is Great?” I know, right? It’s not just that he’s wrong. (It is great, flawed as it is, and for a Harry Potter movie.) It’s that this dude just seems to hate movies and seems begrudging, at best, when doing his job. I hate to say the director of “School for Scoundrels” just provided incisive media criticism that summed it up best, but he really did.

Consider Rosen’s complaint about movies that are omnipresent on the Internet…movies which Rosen, as a person paid to write for a film Web site, is required to read and write about. Or his similar complaint about potential movies that some fans are interested in, that he apparently is bothered to have to constantly cover, for his movie Web site, where he is forced at gunpoint to work. Or consider the fact that he bitched about the Internet spoiling cameos in movies, when he writes for a film Web site that runs precisely those kinds of stories (among others). Or when he gripes about “SNL” hosts not being surprises anymore, even though Movieline actually runs stories about who is hosting “SNL.” (And was it really such a surprise? Does he not recall that the show has long run title cards announcing the following week’s host and musical guest?) Or his overly-negative outlook towards “Thor” based on precious little evidence. Or his preposterous attempt to compare a poor basketball performance to poor box office performances (which I’ve already griped about here).

You get the point. I was reading this interview with Phillips and I was struck by how on-the-nose his comment was. Seeing Rosen’s story pop up in my RSS reader just confirmed it. You’ve got to wonder why somebody who hates movies would want to do a job that requires him to watch and write about movies.