(Above: Wesely Morris, Pulitzer Prize winner for Criticism, film critic.)
I hate to defend terrible movies. Wesely Morris reviewed Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (a film that I also reviewed). While he and I may agree that it was a movie with plot-holes and dumb, Morris COMPLETELY missed key elements. His complaints about plot are actually big glaring signs that he wasn't paying attention. He even mixed up character names.
He has a Pulitzer for Criticism.... An award that I think is akin to getting an Emmy for Bitching. While bitching can be entertaining, a Pulitzer is supposed to be for CONTRIBUTIONS, not detraction's.
Here is the review of his review. It has a spoiler or two.
It starts off actually very interesting, revealing the cliche of reporter movies (and according to him, cop movies). Okay Morris, you have me. I mean, TMNT actually made a running gag about this as April tries to get people to believe her but they react as though she is crazy to very funny effect, but you've brought up an interesting film cliche. Tell me more.
Apparently Whoopi Goldberg understood the cliche and its humor by playing it straight, but Morris did not. He does not expand on his humorous beginning.
Then he gets the plot completely wrong. Don't misunderstand me, there is very little plot. My wife had to leave the theater twice to complain about another patron, and even she was able to tell me two weeks later WHY Shredder was teaming up with (and here Morris didn't even know the characters name, he simply put the actors name) "Fichnter". To quote: "Why the Turtles’ samurai nemesis, Shredder (Tohoru Masamune), and his multitude of heavily armed goons care about making Fichtner rich is unclear..."
He must have been dozing during the entire five minute scene where SACKS (Fichtner's character) explains how he was pretty much raised by Shredder. That's the plot. Shredder wants to destroy the city, and he's using his disciple, not the other way around. How did that slip past a Yale graduate/Pulitzer prize winner?
He then starts off a paragraph with "Anyway". Pulitzer stuff here. (It's fine if I do it, I didn't go to Yale). But if you are going to include that you went to Yale in your biography, you sure as hell aren't "representing". With this "anyway", he segues into how Raphael hits on April the whole movie....
Yeah, that was Michelangelo. So glad you could complain about something you didn't even watch.
The icing on the cake is Morris complaining about how old Megan Fox looks. Wow, real sensitive Morris. In a day and age where girls are committing suicide because of online comments about how Maxim Magazine and Cosmo tell them how to look, you really held your ground and said "NO! Anyone over twenty is ugly and only pretty people should be on screen!" Perhaps you would have preferred some sixteen-year-old spreading her ass-cheeks for an anatomically correct turtle to plow her? I know the movie is about teenagers, and teenagers are hormonal. But how old are you to complain that Fox looks like Morticia Addams?
People give Fox a lot of flak for her acting, but after Seeing Jennifer's Body and ignoring the politics surrounding her, I saw that she is actually very capable (despite the poor material). We all seem to have this predisposed idea that she's dumb/pretty and can't act, so there is a higher standard for her. Oh, well.
I'll skip all the Michael Bay trash talk he does (hey, I did it too. But even I knew that Bay simply threw money at the project not directed it, and I don't care about the politics surrounding the movie. I don't care if Mel Gibson hates Jews, I still like Braveheart. I don't care if Fox and Bay had a tiff and how it plays into the movie. That's just stuff for trolls to lap at).
The ending is a snob slap at anyone who was excited to see this movie, and the fateful "This other movie is better" comparison.
Should you see TMNT? Morris, I guess in his condescending way tells you not to. Would I read any of his other reviews? No. He didn't watch the movie he reviewed.
-4 out of +5.