Lars and the Ripoff
by Scott Hardie on October 23, 2007
I'm sure that Lars and the Real Girl is a good movie and that Ryan Gosling is Oscar-worthy, yadda yadda. But will the bloggers out there spreading the word please stop acting like it's such an original premise to have an adult treat a life-size doll like a real person? In the past few years alone, I've watched indie movies May and Love Object cover the same ground, with Dummy skirting closeby, and those are only a few examples; plenty more exist through the years. There are no original stories in Hollywood (ask Wes Anderson and Sofia Coppola), so enough already.
One Reply to Lars and the Ripoff
Logical Operator
The creator of Funeratic, Scott Hardie, blogs about running this site, losing weight, and other passions including his wife Kelly, his friends, movies, gaming, and Florida. Read more »
Abortion Aborted
Earlier this week, The Onion published another eyebrow-raiser: Actress' Abortion Written Into TV Show, with a photo of Leah Remini. Later that day, it changed without explanation into the much tamer Apple Unveils New Product-Unveiling Product. (link) Normally they never back down from a legal challenge or controversy, and good taste obviously isn't a factor, so I wonder why they changed the article. Go »Appetite for Destruction
My name is Scott, and I'm an addict. I'm not an alcoholic. I almost never drink alcoholic beverages. Go »At Least It's Better Than Bra
You know what sucks, bro? Reading this article a couple of times and later discovering that "bro" has leaked into your everyday speech. Go »Andy Dick Killed Phil Hartman?
How is it I'm only discovering this celebrity scandal ten years later? (link) Go »All King and No Kubrick Make Jack a Dull Boy
I recently got to talking with friends who liked The Shining, both Stephen King's novel and Stanley Kubrick's film adaptation of it, but who were unaware that King has always loathed the movie, despite its reputation as one of the best horror films ever made. It's hard to imagine that a writer doesn't know his own work better than someone interpreting it, but I think this is one of those rare cases where the writer is just too close to the story to get it. Here are three reasons why I think Kubrick's film better understands the material, and is better overall, than King's novel: 1) In King's version, Jack Torrance is a fundamentally decent man who wouldn't hurt a fly, but who is down on his luck and desperate. Go »
Amy Austin | October 23, 2007
Ah, but are you comparing indie to mainstream -- I'd wager that these bloggers you speak of know nothing of the films you mention... not everyone is a true cinema connoisseur, such as yourself. ;-)