The other day, FilmDrunkard David was kind enough to send me the above screencap from the RottenTomatoes reviews page for Shrek Forever After, showing that it had received only one positive review.  And guess who it is, surprise, surprise, our old friend Pete Hammond.   Here’s what Pete says about the film, broken into out-of-context quotes and with exclamation points added, the way he would want it:

“Hilarious and heartfelt from start to finish!”

“The best Shrek of them all!”

“Big laughs and emotion!”

“You can’t beat these beloved Ogres in brilliant 3D (for the first time) for pure entertainment this summer!”

“Shrek is without question the funniest film of the year-at least so far!”

Some of the previous films Pete Hammond deemed “funniest” of their respective genres include:

Heartbreak Kid (“Ben Stiller’s funniest film.”)

Vicky Cristina Barcelona (“Woody Allen’s funniest film in years.”)

Zack and Miri Make a Porno (“The funniest movie I’ve seen all year.”)

Monsters vs. Aliens (“The year’s funniest comedy.”)

Up (“The funniest movie of the summer.”)

The Proposal (“Riotously funny! The Proposal is without question the year’s best comedy.”)

It wasn’t the first time he’d called something “pure entertainment” either.  (“Pure entertainment!” -City Island, “Pure entertainment with great music, wit and a dream cast!” -A Prairie Home Companion, “Pure entertainment from start to finish.” -High School Musical 3, “The most purely entertaining and inventive animated comedy of the year.” -Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs via).

Since the guy’s reviews are basically mad-lib collections of phrases that got him quoted in the marketing material of previous movies and he has no credibility, studios have stopped citing him as a source, saying it only detracts from the idea that reviews are meaningful in the first place.  Haha, just kidding, of course.

Like porn and pleasing me sexually, the entertainment industry is an area in which kissing ass really does pay.  One person who seems to do little BESIDES kissing ass is Pete Hammond, Hollywood.com BoxOffice.com’s movie reviewer who used to work for Maxim and also blogs for the LA Times.  You can often find his quotes shouting at you from the covers of crappy movies like Old Dogs, and The Proposal. He’s arguably the most-quoted critic in Hollywood.  Is that because he’s a respected authority who provides compelling critiques and thoughtful analysis?  Of course not.  It’s because his reviews consist of little more than blatant attempts to be quoted.  You can practically smell the desperation through the computer.

He recently wrote an Iron Man 2 review, and I thought it’d be fun to see if we can identify each specific instance of his blatant quote whoring (hint: it won’t be hard because I’ve put them in bold).  Let’s begin.

Let the summer begin! Iron Man 2, the sequel to 2008’s Marvel blockbuster (grossed over $570 million worldwide), is a sensational way to give the season a kick start…
…It may not be in 3D but look for this 2nd visit to Marvel’s latest cash cow to top the original, not only for ratcheted up action, excitement and pure movie fun but also at the box office and beyond.
As he was the first time around, Downey Jr. is the man!
As one of the new villains, Johansson oozes sex appeal and shows she has a natural flair for martial arts.  Meanwhile the tattooed and imposing Rourke is a hoot with thick Russian accent and a penchant for pet birds. Best of all is Rockwell who plays the low-rent rival of Stark to the hilt, particularly in the opening Senate hearing where he tries to unsuccessfully squash his arrogant competitor.
Fans of the first will not be bored. This Iron Man may not be the Godfather II of comic book movie sequels critics hope for but it is a complete blast anyway.

You can read the review in its entirety here, though I can’t imagine why you’d want to.  It’s not even a review, really, just pure drivel interspersed with attempts at self promotion.  Since I can’t help it, let’s break some of this down:

Read the rest of this entry »

(“…Mom?”)

Gawker posted a salacious piece of investurbative journalism today when they discovered that Variety had scrubbed their own negative review of Roy Scheider’s last film, Iron Cross.  It turns out the move came after the Iron Cross producers complained, seeing as how they’d paid Variety $400,000 to mount an Oscar campaign.

Iron Cross‘ presence on Variety‘s screening series, which is usually reserved for actual Oscar contenders and serves to give members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences a chance to see potential nominees in the theater before the voting begins, was a mystery to many in Hollywood. It was a tiny film by relatively unknown director Newton, and was notable only for the unfortunate fact that Scheider died while making it. But Newton and his fellow producers’ huge outlay to Variety certainly explains its presence, as well as the January Variety story touting the otherwise unremarkable picture as “a World War II revenge drama [that] has hit the screens with hopes of awards.” [Gawker]

I wish I could see what kind of puns Variety’s own writers could come up with for this.  “Iron Cropped?” “Roy (S)Hider?”  Anyway, was that really worth $400K? No one’s even heard of this movie. This was the biggest waste of a few hundred grand since Nic Cage’s dinosaur skull.  The one he bought, I mean.

(From left: Pete Hammond, Sandra Bullock, Retard Pig…)

If you don’t know who Pete Hammond is, he’s the film critic whose talent for sloppy hyperbole would rival Aunt Sylvia after a few Chardonnays, and who spent the early part of this year calling The Proposal “the year’s best comedy” (an eagle stole her Blackberry lol!).  He disappeared for a while, but now he’s back like a diabetic phoenix to take credit for Sandra Bullock’s Best Actress nomination for Blind Side. From Hollywood Elsewhere:

Here’s how it went down, according to an e-mail he sent around this morning:
“I first saw The Blind Side on the WB lot on October 15th. I called WB the next day and asked them afterwards if they knew what they had, that this was Bullock’s Erin Brockovich, and said she can get an Oscar nomination if they campaign it. They weren’t even planning to do that at this stage.
“I held off writing about it and predicting the Oscar nomination until Nov 4th — the first time I talked it up. [...]
“On November 23rd I wrote about it again after the opening weekend’s boxoffice report and put out a public plea for someone, ANYONE to join me on buzzmeter in predicting Bullock. Again I was still alone.”
“That article was used by Santa Barbara Film Festival chief Roger Durling in convincing Sandra’s reps to commit to a tribute and award at the SBIFF when a Best Actress nomination seemed still like a longshot. He first contacted them after the first article on November 4th. He hadn’t even seen the movie at that point.”

Way to go, Pete.  Because, as we all know, getting a movie star’s publicist to agree to an embarrassing tribute at a minor film festival is job #1 for any professional film critic.  Here’s to you, buddy.  *tries to break champagne bottle over Pete’s fat belly, fails, drinks champagne*

I’d love to review Old Dogs just to tell you how bad it is, but there’s a limit to how much I’m willing to suffer for you guys, and I already have to read entertainment columns.  Luckily there are plenty of other creepy shut-ins who’ll say mean things about it for me, and I can use their delicious hate to keep my skin moist and clammy.  In general, I’d say the most common dog pun was about how Old Dogs deserved to be “put down.”

If Old Dogs were a person, I would stab it in the face. -Hitfix

Old Dogs does to the screen what old dogs do to the carpet. It’s unfortunate that only the latter can be taken out and shot. -NY Post

As if to compensate, “Old Dogs” continually cuts away from Williams’ antics to “cute” reaction shots from an actual old dog. -Florida Times-Union

Kids who suffer from progeria may be able to relate to Old Dogs, but it’s hard to imagine anyone else fully appreciating it. -St. Paul Pioneer

“Old Dogs” seems to have lingered in post-production while editors struggled desperately to inject laugh cues. It obviously knows no one will find it funny without being ordered to. How else to explain reaction shots of a dog responding to laugh lines? -Roger Ebert

Let’s see… murder, stabbings, poop, progeria, gunshot wounds — I think that about covers it.  Of course, I did find one guy who liked it.  Guess who it is.  C’mon, just guess.

Read the rest of this entry »