Watching this is suicidal. Excrement on celluloid.
THE ROAD
THE ROAD is one of the most anticipated films of the year. The problem is, the year was 2008. Originally scheduled for a November 14, 2008 release, the movie was delayed numerous times until, finally a year later, it graces the Silver Screen. They should have waited longer. It is suicidal to watch THE ROAD. If you've ever had thoughts of ending it all, this movie will push you right over the edge. I haven't seen a more depressing film since the last Wil Ferrell endeavor.
Now before the artsy-farsty crowd comes out of the woodwork whining about happy endings and reflections of real life, let me say I enjoy a nihilistic conclusion as much as anyone. After all, wasn't it yours truly who wanted Gerald Butler to bring down the entire Judicial system in LAW ABIDING CITIZEN? There is, however, a limit to expect from your entertainment dollar and THE ROAD crosses that limit with no artistic value.
Based on the Pulitzer Price winning novel by Cormac McCarthy, I was forced to wonder if the Pulitzer Committee is in cahoots with the freilocks of the Nobel Prize Committee, especially after they awarded Barack Hussein Obama the Peace Prize. I can just see the folks at Pulitzer reading McCarthy's novel while cutting their arms with box openers, in a variety of neon colors.
THE ROAD boasts an all-star cast including Viggo Mortensen, Robert Duvall, Charlize Theron, and Guy Pearce. This boasting is bogus. Duvall, Theron and Pearce have nothing but cameo roles. Their presence on screen is shorter than any happy feelings you may have had going into this excrement on celluloid. The majority of the film is Mortensen attempting to reach a non-existent Valhalla on a beach while dragging his son, played by newcomer Kodi Smit-McPhee in tow. McPhee is a member of the dreaded three name club; worse he is three name hyphenated. Why? Because we were going to be confused by all the other Kodi McPhee's in Tinsel Town? As the symbol of hope and redemption in a post-apocalyptical world, McPhee is an irritating dirty faced boy who, if Director John Hillcoat really wanted to spare the audience, would have offed in the second or third reel. How's that for an unhappy ending?
KEY SCENES TO LOOK FOR:
1. WHAT? HAVEN'T YOU BEEN READING THIS REVIEW?
2. THE END CREDITS.
A good portion of THE ROAD was filmed in Pennsylvania. As such, if you look closely at the end credits, you'll see the name Jason Planitzer as one of the assistant location managers for the film. Jason's an old friend who began his career years ago with a local talk and skit show. Seeing his name was the only high point of this entire experience.
I don't know how to really say this any nicer. This movie sucks. Its being heralded as a top Oscar contender. This is more of a reflection on the mind set of the Hollywood elite, than it is of great filmmaking. By the time the film is in its third reel, you will wish that whatever caused the initial destruction would return and wipe out what remains. But it doesn't, like the Energizer Bunny, it just keeps going and going, the same scenarios, the same look, the same outcome for sequence after sequence. Maybe that's the true Armageddon %u2013 monotony.
THE RATING FOR THE ROAD = F
BFCA RATING = 0/10
THE ROAD is one of the most anticipated films of the year. The problem is, the year was 2008. Originally scheduled for a November 14, 2008 release, the movie was delayed numerous times until, finally a year later, it graces the Silver Screen. They should have waited longer. It is suicidal to watch THE ROAD. If you've ever had thoughts of ending it all, this movie will push you right over the edge. I haven't seen a more depressing film since the last Wil Ferrell endeavor.
Now before the artsy-farsty crowd comes out of the woodwork whining about happy endings and reflections of real life, let me say I enjoy a nihilistic conclusion as much as anyone. After all, wasn't it yours truly who wanted Gerald Butler to bring down the entire Judicial system in LAW ABIDING CITIZEN? There is, however, a limit to expect from your entertainment dollar and THE ROAD crosses that limit with no artistic value.
Based on the Pulitzer Price winning novel by Cormac McCarthy, I was forced to wonder if the Pulitzer Committee is in cahoots with the freilocks of the Nobel Prize Committee, especially after they awarded Barack Hussein Obama the Peace Prize. I can just see the folks at Pulitzer reading McCarthy's novel while cutting their arms with box openers, in a variety of neon colors.
THE ROAD boasts an all-star cast including Viggo Mortensen, Robert Duvall, Charlize Theron, and Guy Pearce. This boasting is bogus. Duvall, Theron and Pearce have nothing but cameo roles. Their presence on screen is shorter than any happy feelings you may have had going into this excrement on celluloid. The majority of the film is Mortensen attempting to reach a non-existent Valhalla on a beach while dragging his son, played by newcomer Kodi Smit-McPhee in tow. McPhee is a member of the dreaded three name club; worse he is three name hyphenated. Why? Because we were going to be confused by all the other Kodi McPhee's in Tinsel Town? As the symbol of hope and redemption in a post-apocalyptical world, McPhee is an irritating dirty faced boy who, if Director John Hillcoat really wanted to spare the audience, would have offed in the second or third reel. How's that for an unhappy ending?
KEY SCENES TO LOOK FOR:
1. WHAT? HAVEN'T YOU BEEN READING THIS REVIEW?
2. THE END CREDITS.
A good portion of THE ROAD was filmed in Pennsylvania. As such, if you look closely at the end credits, you'll see the name Jason Planitzer as one of the assistant location managers for the film. Jason's an old friend who began his career years ago with a local talk and skit show. Seeing his name was the only high point of this entire experience.
I don't know how to really say this any nicer. This movie sucks. Its being heralded as a top Oscar contender. This is more of a reflection on the mind set of the Hollywood elite, than it is of great filmmaking. By the time the film is in its third reel, you will wish that whatever caused the initial destruction would return and wipe out what remains. But it doesn't, like the Energizer Bunny, it just keeps going and going, the same scenarios, the same look, the same outcome for sequence after sequence. Maybe that's the true Armageddon %u2013 monotony.
THE RATING FOR THE ROAD = F
BFCA RATING = 0/10
(1-20 of 25 posts) | Reply
on Nov 24 2009 01:54 PM Horrible review. (Reply to this) |
on Nov 24 2009 01:59 PM Jesus. (Reply to this) |
on Nov 24 2009 02:08 PM It's funny how someone can call something "excrement" while simultaneously being one of the crappiest writers I've ever read. (Reply to this) |
on Nov 24 2009 02:23 PM ladies and gentlemen, the new victoria alexander! (Reply to this) |
on Nov 24 2009 02:24 PM Wow, I'm not sure if this was a review or a diatribe on critics and politics and anything else that sort of spilled out of the writer's mind. I don't know if this movie will be any good or not, but I doubt it's as bad as this person makes it out to be. (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 24 2009 02:31 PM What you wrote is not a review. There is no critical analysis in evidence, just a series of juvenile comments that tell us nothing except how limited your qualifications are. Case in point: "The majority of the film is Mortensen attempting to reach a non-existent Valhalla on a beach while dragging his son, played by newcomer Kodi Smit-McPhee in tow. McPhee is a member of the dreaded three name club; worse he is three name hyphenated. Why? Because we were going to be confused by all the other Kodi McPhee's in Tinsel Town? As the symbol of hope and redemption in a post-apocalyptical world, McPhee is an irritating dirty faced boy who, if Director John Hillcoat really wanted to spare the audience, would have offed in the second or third reel." Were you giggling while you wrote this because you thought you were witty? Or were you just looking for attention? Pathetic. (Reply to this) |
on Nov 24 2009 02:53 PM Um, what? You're a joke. Never have I read such a poorly written review. If you didn't like it, that's totally fine. But a 0/10? Who do you think you are? (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 24 2009 03:01 PM Wow, how can you say you enjoy nihilism when you compare this interest to some ridiculous alternate ending to LAW ABIDING CITIZEN. People like you are probably one of the main reasons that TWC delayed this film for so long. They knew that there were so many people that can't handle something depressing. I don't know how many times I've gone to a movie with a sad ending, only to hear the audience exclaim "that was awful, why did it have to be so sad?" If you know you don't like movies like this, don't see them and don't skew the movie's potential by writing immature reviews like this. (Reply to this) |
on Nov 24 2009 03:50 PM This is one of the most uninformed reviews I've ever read in my life. I still don't know why you don't like it. The only thing I can guess from what you wrote is that you were bored. You were so busy trying to be witty that you forgot to review the movie. Try sharing your thoughts on the production itself. Comment on some key points. ANALYZE SOMETHING. Write an outline so that you have some kind of organization. This review is a mess. (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 24 2009 06:25 PM I see the phrase "excrement on celluloid" pop up in several more of your reviews. A tip: considering your reviews are in about the same class, I'd find a new catchphrase. Stop using stupid throwaway lines if you want anyone to actually take you seriously. (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 24 2009 08:06 PM In reply to this comment (#2564896) Seriously get a new line besides "excrement on celluloid". You've used it several times in other reviews. honeslty using the line so often makes you look like an idiot not worthy of being paid attention to (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 24 2009 08:11 PM I just read the blurb here I didn't read the review because I have learned from experience that you're a horrible reviewer and writer. everybody ignore this reviewer (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 24 2009 08:29 PM I just read the blurb here I didn't read the review because I have learned from experience that you're a horrible reviewer and writer. everybody ignore this reviewer (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 25 2009 12:46 AM I would question your objectivity, but you appear to have a brain and the ability to write, but I am not sure where it went. It was more complaining than an actual structured review, it was almost the equivalent of a "THIS MOVIE BLOWS!!!" review on amazon. lol But I get the idea that you've done this long enough that you just don't care what others say anyway... :p I can respect that, but not when it throws constructive journalism out the window. I give you an "F" for failing to thoroughly review the movies content and explain your stance better even if I do agree with you on some points. :p God Bless ~Amy (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 25 2009 06:09 AM You pan this movie while giving Ninja Assassin a 10 out of 10???? Really???? (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 25 2009 03:53 PM Rottentomatoes is turning into a joke, with the "critics" they're allowing. I sent them a message about this guy and then sent a message directly to the "Broadcast Film Critics Association." RT automatically allows BFCA members to be official critics here, without extra verification. Here's the letter I sent to the BFCA that hits a lot of the points I sent to RT: Your organization does not properly screen its members. Currently, one of your members, Fiore Mastraci, is using his affiliation with your organization to gain access to the site "rottentomatoes.com", a widely read and imporant critic aggregator, as an "official critic". His profile on you site is located at: I don't know what other BFCA critics there are, but I've been noticing that RT is doing a piss poor job of screening critics. If I wanted an aggregator of Joe Schmo, I'd go somewhere else. Do your effing job RT (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 26 2009 03:08 AM Four things: 1. If you want to be a serious reviewer (which I assume is your goal), how about you actually analyze the film(s) and give logical reasons as to why you liked or disliked it. I don't need to read 5 paragraphs of someone just making "funny", idiotic quips. How was the pacing? How were the characters? How were the performances? Any pacing problems? How was the plot? Was it intriguing or just plain boring? Anything feel contrived or cliche? How was the imagery? How was the cinematography? These are questions you need to ask yourself and then answer in your review. 2. It's obvious you've never really studied or understood film as art. It seems you're of the belief that movies serve one purpose: entertainment. If that's the case, I'm sorry but you shouldn't be a film critic. Movies can be both entertainment and masterworks of art; as such, you should go into a movie expecting either and then basing your review on what the movie's intentions were. You can't be so closed-minded as to ridicule this movie simply because it was too depressing. How about you think outside the box for once? 3. Why the hell did you bring politics into your review? This **** makes me so mad. I see it everywhere; from Republicans to Democrats. For the record, I'm not a Democrat, but I definitely know when to bring the subject of politics up. For one, this movie had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with politics; but you decided to have a "har har Barrack HUSSEIN Obama" comment in there just for your self-indulgent kicks. No one needs nor wants to read about your politics, buddy. If this were a site devoted to politics and you were reviewing a movie about politics, then maybe I would understand. However, this movie had no political undertones. Seriously, knock that **** off. It's annoying as all hell and isn't helping the country. 4. Rotten Tomatoes need to take your pedestrian *** of their site immediately. (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 26 2009 08:42 PM Excellent review. I was laughing the entire time while reading it, and it seems you and I feel the same way over LAC. So, ignore the typical RT morons that can't handle someone bashing their new favorite infatuation, they have neither the courage to look deeper nor the ability to see things open-mindedly. The best they can do is bash your credentials. Screw 'em. (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 26 2009 08:44 PM BTW, to the guy above, if you think 'journalism' is subjective movie reviewing, you're dumber than you sound. Journalism is an objective recording of current facts through a dispassionate narrative, so check your dictionary (if you won one) before you attempt to sound smarter than you are. (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 27 2009 11:45 PM I'm glad you disliked the movie so much you felt it necessary to take a dump on one of the actors last name. Bravo sir, well played. (Reply to this) |
| You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register. |
Other News
Related Articles
- The Future is Now! 10 Years of Movie Predictions (47)
- Win Tickets To See The Road (0)
- Critics Consensus: Flee From Ninja Assassin (47)
-
Viggo Mortensen Dismisses Retirement Rumors, Talks The Road
(12)
-
Up in the Air, The Road Impress at Telluride
(5)
-
Trailer Bulletin: The Road
(30)
-
The Road Leads to October
(13)
- Exclusive: McG Talks Terminator Salvation (24)
-
The Road Leads to 2009?
(14)
-
Pictures from The Road
(9)
Latest Features
- Five Favorite Films With Precious' Gabby Sidibe (35)
- Five Favourite Films with Anika Noni Rose (17)
- Five Facts About Alice in Wonderland (70)
- 25 Movies So Bad They're Unmissable (113)
- The Future is Now! 10 Years of Movie Predictions (47)
- Meet the Universal Monsters Starting Lineup! (52)
- The 10 Most Unlikely Kids Movie Stars (34)
- 10 High Altitude Performances (20)
- Critics Choose Must-Sees and Worsts of 2009 (280)
- RT's Best of the Decade! (202)
RSS Feeds
