Best Movie Reviews Ever

[EEVILMURRAY]

Whilst trolling Imdb, my flatmate and I came across a outside review of the film which almost had me in tears. He's still laughing about it.

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0339294/

 

Just in case you can't be bothered to click. Here's the review:

 

This is the biggest piece of CRAP i've ever seen. i could write a better script than that. hell this kid Tyrone who cant even read or write can write a better script than that. the acting was like a monkey licking a dogs penis while giving a reach around to a angry raccoon. The writer must have been on crack and was probably giving a blow job to a beaver with down syndrome. anyone who liked this movie must be a homosexual. So stop sucking dick and watch it again.the leprechaun was a complete douche bag, always asking politely for his gold before getting the crap beat out of him, only to arise and ask again after killing some people. GAY. really really gay

 

 

Anyone else got anything they'd like to share?

[faz99]

Whilst trolling Imdb, my flatmate and I came across a outside review of the film which almost had me in tears. He's still laughing about it.

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0339294/

 

Just in case you can't be bothered to click. Here's the review:

 

 

 

 

Anyone else got anything they'd like to share?

 

I came in here expecting an amazing review. In depth and what not. Or, the best movie reviews ever as you put it.

Instead i got this crap? I didn't even find that funny.

 

And obviously i must love this film, because I am gay. According to the review anyway.

Bit of an anti climax there sorry, lol.

[demonmike04]

Lmao nice review, but it wouldnt suprise me if he turned out to be the Gay Time's moral enemy.

 

Havent heard any film reviews that made me laugh however, funnily enough my friend was showing me pictures of the Leprechaun movies the other day which left me utterly confused.

[Monopolyman]

I thought this one about The Godfather was quite witty...

 

Want to understand bad melodrama? Take Mr. Cranky's one-questionquiz:

 

The head of one of the largest Italian mafia families -- a family comprised of the likes of Don Corleone (Marlon Brando), Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), Sonny (James Caan) and Michael (Al Pacino) for example -- comes to you and asks for a favor. This favor might be inconvenient, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility. Your response is:

 

 

A) You agree to do the favor.

B) You negotiate a bit, with the intention of agreeing.

C) You say "I need to think about it" and then don't return any of the Godfather's calls.

D) You spit out your cannoli and call the Godfather or his representative "a stupid !@#$%^ guinea."

 

Pardon me for being a bit skeptical about the intelligence of the characters faced with such decisions in "The Godfather," but it seems to me they're a bit quick to decide that "D" is a wise business decision. I mean, if you're a little dim, you may well think about answering with "B," but let's face it: If you choose "D," you're just a frickin' moron who is probably best removed from the gene pool anyway.

Two significant characters in "The Godfather" pick "D": Jack Woltz (John Marley), the film producer who won't give Johnny Fontane (Al Martino) a job, and Moe Greene (Alex Rocco), the Las Vegas casino owner. Without their unbelievable stupidity, "The Godfather" would have been about nothing more than Italian guys sitting around at home.

 

 

Anyway, that Lep. 3 review was hil-arious, though.

[KingJoe]

And obviously i must love this film, because I am gay. According to the review anyway.

Bit of an anti climax there sorry, lol.

 

Logical fallacy. Everyone who enjoys thefilm is gay, not everyone who is gay enjoys the film. Compare everyone who is gay has sexual feelings. This is true. However, everyone who has sexual feelings is not gay. Which is what I keep telling the strange man at the bus stop with the funny hat.

[faz99]

Logical fallacy. Everyone who enjoys thefilm is gay, not everyone who is gay enjoys the film. Compare everyone who is gay has sexual feelings. This is true. However, everyone who has sexual feelings is not gay. Which is what I keep telling the strange man at the bus stop with the funny hat.

 

That didn't make sense. What the hell are you comparing it to? Even that seemed more like a riddle than anything else.

 

Also it was...

anyone who liked this movie must be a homosexual.

 

I would look at that as, if you like the film, that means you must be a homo. And the same vice versa. Anyone who is homo, must have liked the film.

 

If it is dark, there must be no light. If there is no light, it must be dark?

Ok, i am confusing myself now. But you knew exactly what i meant from the start. So blah.

[Indigo]

That didn't make sense. What the hell are you comparing it to? Even that seemed more like a riddle than anything else.

 

Also it was...

 

 

I would look at that as, if you like the film, that means you must be a homo. And the same vice versa. Anyone who is homo, must have liked the film.

 

If it is dark, there must be no light. If there is no light, it must be dark?

Ok, i am confusing myself now. But you knew exactly what i meant from the start. So blah.

That's a very poor analogy. Put your politics aside and re-read his post, he's right, and it does make sense.

[faz99]

That's a very poor analogy. Put your politics aside and re-read his post, he's right, and it does make sense.

 

Since when was i getting political?

[jayseven]

here's a reiteration, faz.

 

London buses are all red.

 

... But are all red things london buses? Coins are made of metal, but not all metal things are coins. See the logic? The only people who use tampax are women does not mean all women use tampax! Easypeasy.

[faz99]

Yes, ok thats makes sense. But you are forgetting its a different sentence.

 

anyone who liked this movie must be a homosexual.

 

Now, while you are applying the all x are y. That doesn't mean all y are x.

 

But here it is if x likes y, then they must be z.. because z like those things (which is implied).

 

its not a case of x is y, or anything, this sentence has past tense and present, posing completley different problems.

 

Omg, you'd swear i give i shit about the whole gay thing when i dont, but i would love to know now the proper english of it all

Sooo hi jacking the thread right now. lol

[Mr_Odwin]

The sentence says that if you like the movie you are homosexual, it does not say that if you are homosexual you must like it. According to this sentence you may be a homosexual that dislikes it, but if you like it you definitely are homosexual. So, in conclusion, no heterosexuals like the film (it's impossible to both like the film and be a heterosexual), but if you dislike it you may or may not be a homosexual.

[jayseven]

Yes, ok thats makes sense. But you are forgetting its a different sentence.

 

 

 

Now, while you are applying the all x are y. That doesn't mean all y are x.

 

But here it is if x likes y, then they must be z.. because z like those things (which is implied).

 

its not a case of x is y, or anything, this sentence has past tense and present, posing completley different problems.

 

Omg, you'd swear i give i shit about the whole gay thing when i dont, but i would love to know now the proper english of it all

Sooo hi jacking the thread right now. lol

 

If george likes the colour green, he must be gay. Does that mean that all gays like the colour green?

 

I think i see waht you mean :P you're still wrong though. That statement doesn't say that all gay's like the colour green, it just says that everyone who likes teh colour green is gay! tricksy stuff.

 

It's language like THIS which makes a lot of philosophy seem so besides teh point.

[faz99]

Yeah tis pretty confusing, anyways, i might delete my posts now, its like a thread completley beside what it was made for!

[jayseven]

not at all dude. if it weren't for people like you, the people who just read these posts and never admit to not knowing anything would never actually learn anything. A spark in the woods, boy!