Helen Hanahoe

Another example of a movie where the vast majority of it's audience disagree with the critics. Most of whose reception to this film was Luke warm. This gap between the opinion of movie critics & the opinion of the movies watching publications seems to be getting wider & ever more prevalent. Which begs the question, what's the the point all of various movie reviewing sites & publications if not to help people decide on which film to go & see, or indeed, whether a films actually worth paying the outrageous priceless of up to £10 per cinema ticket. Which is OK if you're only paying for one, but exorbitant at £40 for a family of four. Of course as at parent you're compelled to take your kids to certain major big name movies, which regardless of quality, they'll conclude were "brilliant" &, to add insult to injury, pester you into buying the DVD on the day its released & then insisting we watch it on loop until I know it off by heart. This is particularly galling as all this extra expense is entirely my fault (apparently). It was in no way down to her (those were the days) insatiable sexual appetite & her rampant (perfectly understandable) uncontrollable lust. We were on holiday & she'd picked up the wrong box of tablets, realising the alternative, she insisting she was "safe" & that even though she's missed 2 or 3 pills the odds of her conceiving were truly astronomical..... Unfortunately, rather than rely on professional medical advice or facts, this was entirely based on "what she reckoned". She only confessed because after 6-8wks she developed hideous morning sickness. - Now, for any one who has bothered to read all of this rather lengthy epistle, for the reason I bought that up!! - When considering both; A;. My Mrs. contraception at Thatcher's time, & B; Todays movie critics, I came to the same fundamental & undeniably inevitable conclusion; They are/were both superfluous & utterly redundant. What is the point in having critics to review films if their opinions on what they find enjoyable & what exactly constitutes an entertaining 2hrs+ , is so far removed from that which the film watching public does?? To keep with my theme, I'd compare them all to a condom it dreamed of one day adorning a gentleman & experiencing that female paradise of Venus internally. However, it was damaged during packing. It therefore failed quality control due to it's being split/ burst. This renders the condom utterly useless, without merit or purpose. With no hope of it ever achieving the one sole function it was manufactured for, it's whole existence has become futile, all that can be done is to recycle it. - This is serves as a rather convoluted metaphor for the average film critic. They once had dreams of being either a successful actor/ writer/ director etc. Unfortunately, they too failed to reach the level of quality required &, as the saying goes " Those who cant do, teach..... As long as they can achieve the minimal qualifications needed..... - Those who can't teach, well........ They do the only thing that people without talent or ability or qualifications can do:- - They criticize those that can..... But, I fear too many have developed an undeserved ego & unjustified sense of their own importance. Perhaps believing that every movie must be of Oscar nominated standard in all of its many movie making categories. Why does every film have to be a "Gone With The Wind" or "Ghandi" or "The Godfather". Yes, those films are exceptional, hugely admired classics, but they are also toi long winded ( 2 out of the three are, in my opinion) & deal with pretty heavy, strong, serious issues/ themes. I'm fairly certain that most people, like me, have to be in the mood to watch one of those. I don't understand nor do I feel anything other than contempt for those who believe they have the right to judge the superiority or interior of any movie. Movies are an art form, & beauty is in the eye of the beholder. As with any all of the arts, it is only the individuals own opinion & taste that has any relevance or meaning. Phew. Blame insomnia