Warning: main(http://www.azstarnet.com/altsn/aznightbuzzcalfyout/aznightbuzzonscreen/) [function.main]: failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found
in /usr/local/apache_2.0.52/htdocs/aznightbuzz/caliente_nav.php on line 14
Fatal error: main() [function.require]: Failed opening required 'http://www.azstarnet.com/altsn/aznightbuzzcalfyout/aznightbuzzonscreen/' (include_path='.:/usr/local/lib/php') in /usr/local/apache_2.0.52/htdocs/aznightbuzz/caliente_nav.php on line 14
Caliente Contest
This week's Spotlight focuses on the Austin, Texas-based rock band White Denim, which is scheduled to play Club Congress Saturday.
White Denim's lead singer is James Petralli, whose father is former major league catcher Geno Petralli.
Geno Petralli played 12 seasons for the Rangers and Blue Jays.
Petralli led all of baseball in passed balls with 35 in 1987, 20 in 1988, and 20 in 1990. His 35 passed balls established a Major League single-season record.
Most of Petralli's past balls occurred when he was catching a famous knuckleball pitcher.
For a chance to win an audio book tell us the name of that knuckleballer, who pitched until he was 46 years old.
Phil Villarreal has worked for the Daily Star since birth, but he's been the movie critic since February 2001. You could say he's a fan of the cinema. Each day he wakes up to a plate of steaming scrambled movies, which he washes down with a glass of movie juice, all while watching a movie. In his free time he plays video games and watches movies. Phil's new book, the humorous, money saving guide "Secrets of a Stingy Scoundrel" is due out Sept. 1 and available for preorder.
Geez, pining for attention again are we? Weren’t you the first critic to give ‘Ratatouille’ a rotten rating last year? What gives, Pixar turned you down for a job?
How can someone who claims to “each day wake up to a plate of steaming scrambled movies, which he washes down with a glass of movie juice, all while watching a movie” have such bad taste in movies???
Oh come on Phillip, Short Circuit, while a great fun film, was by no means the “original” film with a Robot. And of course Wall-E and Short Circuit don’t look even remotely alike and their storylines are very different. Saying the one film is the same as the other because they both are about Robots is like saying a Porche and a Lexus are the same because they’re both cars. Both films can co-exist, because they’re different stories. Otherwise it’s like saying all westerns are copies, or all action films are copies, or all rom-coms are copies (oh wait, that one might be true <g>) But you can make more than one film about a robot.
Philip like that’s anything to be proud of. You’re also a moron are you proud of that?
note: I’m American so you gotta think of some other comeback for me. My money says you’ll try to call me a Benedict Arnold or something like that. Let me just say ahead of time, (sarcastic)real original Philip.
Phil- The fact that you completely misstated a major portion of the plot shows that you aren’t intelligent enough to understand the film. No wonder you didn’t like it.
Phil, I haven’t seen this movie, but I hate you for speaking badly about it. I will hunt you down in my Wall-E costume and make you eat silicon and PCB!
Using words like “resplendent” doesn’t make you sound intelligent. It makes you sound like someone who’s trying desperately to sound intelligent…and failing miserably.
First Ratatouille and now this. You’re a disgrace.
Your review is a disgrace. I agree with the person who said Pixar must have turned you down for a job. Maybe you should stick to torture porn and have someone else who can appreciate a good movie do the Pixar reviews in the future.
What a douche. Did you lose custody of your kids? Girlfriend leave you? Not because you gave a bad review, but the reason you gave for it, and the fact you did the same thing with the previous Pixar movie makes you a disgruntled wannabe.
You must agree with us! All critics everywhere must agree with our preternaturally certain, utterly unfounded speculation! Otherwise society itself courts anarchy! Anarchy, I says! And what kind of word is “resplendent”? Stop trying to sound intelligent and speak English!
I don’t know if I disagree “completely” with your review, but seeing that you gave 10,000 BC a similar review… well that’s a shock. And you gave “The Happening” a favorable review as well.
No disrespect, but with your reviews are really bizarre, and I just don’t trust them.
What, didn’t Mom and Dad give you enough attention when you were a kid? LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!! I’m the only critic to see through Pixar’s clever ruse of producing modern classics. What color is the sky in your world when The Happening is a better film than Wall-e?
dude seriously you need to go out to the grocery store nearest you and suck on something big i’m not quite sure what, but you’ll know!!you suck at reviewing… WALL-E PWNS you to the max!!
I think I found out why he didnt like the movie, I think he didnt saw the same one as every others critics in the country who think Wall-E is a piece of art and one of the top movie of this year. It’s either that, or you are simply one of the worst critics I’ve seen in a very long time.
Did a stranger touch you in the potty place during a screening of “Toy Story” or something? That’s the only explanation I can think of for your irrational view of Pixar films. “When A Stranger Calls” gets a pass? “10,000 BC”?! Someone needs to revoke your professional critic privileges.
Yawn. Obviously he gives Pixar films bad reviews because he wants people to notice him (poor guy). Take a look at the number of comments here as opposed to those of other reviewers. When I read a review I always take into account who the person is reviewing it (remember when Columbia Pictures actually invented fake reviewer names for their ad copy a few years ago?) So just pity this guy and let him have his two seconds in the spotlight. Everyone knows he’s a joke. I guess it’s easier to write a trash review than to have to appear on Jerry Springer.
I swear to god man you are a complete moron. I hope you get fired cause you are obviosly not good at your job. Sure you’re supposed to give criticism, but you’re also supposed to give a fair one. You obviously have something against PIXAR and for you to use your position as a stepping stone for your own Agenda is simply irresponsible. I really hope your editor reads all these comments and fires your @ss.
I’ve been complaining about this retard for years and I’m seriously sick of him. A good review for “The Happening”? Really Phil? You suck at your job and you need to hang yourself. This guy needs to be fired and then beaten with a pillowcase full of bars of soap.
Come on, guys. It’s not like his opinion is relevant or anything. I mean, look at the publication – the Arizona Daily Star. Who here has even heard of this non-news source (be honest).
It’s likely that this woe-ridden paper has a hard enough time finding someone who even wants to spend his or her time chugging out movie reviews that are intended for no one. The only reason why we even looked at the review is because it’s a pockmark on an otherwise perfect-10 Pixar film.
The truth is, this guy’s entitled to his own opinion. Even if he takes his personal tastes and injects it into the review. Even if his department can only afford a webcam from the ’90s for the video review. Even if he embarrassingly tries to graft words like “resplendent” into sentences.
“Hi, I’m Phil Villarreal, it’s not that I have no taste, I reviewed this movie this way because I want attention. Maybe I’ll get to be mentioned in the Buzz! on Yahoo or on Extra! as the ass who gave Wall-E a bad review while using “big” words like a jackass.”
I mean really, you used resplendent in a negative review. That is just plain jackassery.
Um, why does he have to be a “douche” for not liking this movie? Or not agreeing with you? Really, I can’t believe the comments on here. First of all, the purpose of a film CRITIC is to CRITIQUE films. Films, like all other art forms, are meant to spark discussion. Without a reaction to them, what purpose do they serve? Nobody has the same reaction. And I’m not sure what’s more maddening — the fact that he has a point about Wall-E existing less for entertainment and more for critics, that he’s saying what others are thinking and would never say out loud, or that 95% of the negative comments on here are coming from assholes who haven’t even seen the film yet…and if u claim otherwise, chances are you’re LYING. And the fact that there are so many bitter, Pixar cock-riding sheep that are so completely offended by this review makes me respect it even more. Pixar is a little overrated…GET OVER IT. His opinion is HISOPINION, and if u don’t like it, you can go get ass raped by Al Gore.
This whole page is full of idiots with a side of epic phail.
First:The movies this guy passes is truly strange and I doubt Ill trust his review anyway.
Second:Who here has even seen the movie anyway.
Third:Plots are different but possibly could be inspired from short circuit.
fourth:Watch ur language ppls
fifth:Are u actually reading this? You must be very bored.
sixth: making phun of his paper even though you’ve never read it.
seventh: Stephen and his excessive bolding
eigth:using ph instead of F, making long lists, and watching Jay Leno is fun.
ninth:Do you guys fantasize about his parents touching him or what, sheesh.
and tenth:boy this post is long. Maybe it is the worst thing on this page. I should end this.
P.S. You “accidentally” deleted your review. WTF!?
@Some Guy:
1. No-one cares.
2. People have seen WALL-E at an advanced screening. (I hope Matthew’s reading this)
3. What the hell has Jay Leno got to do with anything?
4. I was bored when reading your comment.
5. Putting the dumber things in your comment (e.g. “Stephen and his excessive bolding”) and using “ph” instead of “f” ain’t gonna get you anywhere.
6. I agree with the 10th part. It IS the worst on the page.
7. I’m proud to be an “idiot”, thank you very much.
It’s people like you who ruin the movie industry. Even Roeper gave it a great rating. How can you be taken seriously if you don’t appreciate great movies?
Thank You Max. You totally didnt understand the point of my post. Here are some comebacks to all your comments
1:Obviously, you care
2:I meant the ppl posting the comments, we know most have not seen it
3:You didnt understand the point of my original post and if you did you would understand why he is so important
4:That was a hard comeback wasnt it? Practically gave it to you on a silver platter
5:“Same as No. 3”
6:Obviously you are joking with the post such as, and I qoute, “You can go get ass raped by Al Gore.”
7:I’m glad to hear that!
BTW if you didn’t get it by now. Most of my original post was a big joke.
Phil Villarreal’s review of Wall-E is about to send anyone who sees the film through the roof.
I read the review twice (likely once more than you) and I can’t get past the lack of genuine introspection and consideration that you failed to give this movie. Stating that Wall-E “(Is) not a thrill ride” is like saying “The God Father” wasn’t hilarious. Wall-E isn’t a movie that hits you over the head with antics, there’s a story going on here that’s both poignant and endearing to adults and wide-eyed fascinating to younger viewers. This isn’t a movie that will necessarily stick to your funnybone but it will, at least for ninety minutes, become part of your soul.
To further confound your opinions, your video review states that the film is “visually resplendent” which, when I was going to college meant, “radiant” and dazzling” yet drags too much at times.
Also, Mr. Villarreal you say, “Wall-E has the silent clown sensibilities of Buster Keaton.” I heartily agree, and although I wouldn’t go ahead and call your comment plagiarism in the first degree, it is interesting to me that even the New York Daily News attributed that same comment to it’s original source which was the studio press kit.
I did get something distinctly refreshing out of this review however, and it was the realization that Mr. Villarreal is clearly one of those reviewers who deliberately go against the grain in the hopes that his lack of original thought will provoke the ire of the reader, or, be that special someone who gives a rave review to a real stinker in the hopes that he’ll find his name under a blurb in a full-page studio ad. I can see it now, Phil Villareal call’s “National Lampoon Gold Digger’s II” the funniest movie since Caddy Shack, more exciting that “Die Hard” and more heart warming than “Old Yeller.” Gimme me a break.
Don’t you know you’re not allowed to mildly disapprove of a Pixar movie? GOsh!!1!
I’m gonna go over to Rotten Tomatoes, where your review is currently listed as the only ‘rotten’ one, and copy/paste a bunch of talkback comments under a number of fake ‘net handles and pretend like there’s an army of people that agree with me.
I’m not going to acknowledge that your review isn’t really all that negative and that you actually say the film is visually stunning and that it will be an Oscar contender for Best Picture. Naw… I’ll just piss and moan and contemplate suicide because I just can’t deal with RT having ONE reviewer in the country that doesn’t have his/her hands cupping Wally’s balls.
Oh yeah… and Wally isn’t a Johnny 5 ripoff either.
wow, Ive never seen so many
immature “adults” argue and over react over a computer animated cartoon, you all do realize this is a movie right? its not the end of the world because one reviewer thought it was just another pixar kids movie that didnt accomplish anything. some people just have way too much time on thier hands and like to jump on the bandwagon and wine, great review phil
Great ! Phil, you are the only one, so You are the greatest ! The film is a leftist propaganda pro-Global Warming ! Dangerous for kids ! We will protest here in Italy when the film will be issue next October. I will translate your review in Italian in my blog http://ambientalismodirazza.blogspot.com/
Why? your opinion always sucks.
— brian Smith 06/25/2008 01:50 PM #
the kinds of things u said about this movie just make me feel sorry for u. being critical isnt the same as being cynical
— ted 06/25/2008 02:05 PM #
Wow man, terrible review. Maybe compare it to some other films out there and see how it stands — Wall-e is art.
— Al 06/25/2008 02:20 PM #
U suck.. This movie is great :)
Seriously.
— Markus 06/25/2008 02:33 PM #
Geez, pining for attention again are we? Weren’t you the first critic to give ‘Ratatouille’ a rotten rating last year? What gives, Pixar turned you down for a job?
— Richard 06/25/2008 02:41 PM #
How can someone who claims to “each day wake up to a plate of steaming scrambled movies, which he washes down with a glass of movie juice, all while watching a movie” have such bad taste in movies???
— Mike 06/25/2008 02:52 PM #
Your video review is great…
…for me to poop on.
— Bob 06/25/2008 02:57 PM #
I thought this movie looked dumb from the get-go.
Which reminds me… I picked up ‘Short Circuit’ on Blu-ray last week. I prefer to watch ‘the original’, lol.
— Phillip 06/25/2008 03:05 PM #
EPIC FAIL. Phillip, you suck as well.
— Max 06/25/2008 03:16 PM #
At least I’m an American. :-P
— Phillip 06/25/2008 03:33 PM #
Oh come on Phillip, Short Circuit, while a great fun film, was by no means the “original” film with a Robot. And of course Wall-E and Short Circuit don’t look even remotely alike and their storylines are very different. Saying the one film is the same as the other because they both are about Robots is like saying a Porche and a Lexus are the same because they’re both cars. Both films can co-exist, because they’re different stories. Otherwise it’s like saying all westerns are copies, or all action films are copies, or all rom-coms are copies (oh wait, that one might be true <g>) But you can make more than one film about a robot.
— jennifer carlson 06/25/2008 03:39 PM #
Philip like that’s anything to be proud of. You’re also a moron are you proud of that?
note: I’m American so you gotta think of some other comeback for me. My money says you’ll try to call me a Benedict Arnold or something like that. Let me just say ahead of time, (sarcastic)real original Philip.
— John 06/25/2008 03:43 PM #
Phil- The fact that you completely misstated a major portion of the plot shows that you aren’t intelligent enough to understand the film. No wonder you didn’t like it.
— Jur Stewphed 06/25/2008 04:10 PM #
You have no taste. It’s a wonder they let you review movies.
— Dan 06/25/2008 04:17 PM #
Phil, I haven’t seen this movie, but I hate you for speaking badly about it. I will hunt you down in my Wall-E costume and make you eat silicon and PCB!
— PedoPhil 06/25/2008 04:18 PM #
Newsflash Phil,
Using words like “resplendent” doesn’t make you sound intelligent. It makes you sound like someone who’s trying desperately to sound intelligent…and failing miserably.
First Ratatouille and now this. You’re a disgrace.
— Guy with Taste 06/25/2008 04:32 PM #
Your review is a disgrace. I agree with the person who said Pixar must have turned you down for a job. Maybe you should stick to torture porn and have someone else who can appreciate a good movie do the Pixar reviews in the future.
— EVE 06/25/2008 05:15 PM #
wow. you are stupid. your reviews are always terrible. all of them.
— not stupid 06/25/2008 06:07 PM #
What a douche. Did you lose custody of your kids? Girlfriend leave you? Not because you gave a bad review, but the reason you gave for it, and the fact you did the same thing with the previous Pixar movie makes you a disgruntled wannabe.
— carmen 06/25/2008 06:33 PM #
come on, say the proper things and maybe i’ll gain some respect for you in the future
— -ruserious? 06/25/2008 06:55 PM #
Are you F***ing serious?!?
— Steve 06/25/2008 06:56 PM #
You must agree with us! All critics everywhere must agree with our preternaturally certain, utterly unfounded speculation! Otherwise society itself courts anarchy! Anarchy, I says! And what kind of word is “resplendent”? Stop trying to sound intelligent and speak English!
— fandom 06/25/2008 07:04 PM #
haha I was going to tear a complete strip off this “review”, but I think enough people have done that already.. resplendent? what the fuck?
— bijio 06/25/2008 07:11 PM #
I don’t know if I disagree “completely” with your review, but seeing that you gave 10,000 BC a similar review… well that’s a shock. And you gave “The Happening” a favorable review as well.
No disrespect, but with your reviews are really bizarre, and I just don’t trust them.
— Dan 06/25/2008 07:31 PM #
stop giving arizona a bad name with your reviews
— nuggets 06/25/2008 07:50 PM #
What, didn’t Mom and Dad give you enough attention when you were a kid? LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!! I’m the only critic to see through Pixar’s clever ruse of producing modern classics. What color is the sky in your world when The Happening is a better film than Wall-e?
— Steve Dierks 06/25/2008 08:05 PM #
Lol at the same person posting over and over using different names.
— Phillip L 06/25/2008 08:15 PM #
dude seriously you need to go out to the grocery store nearest you and suck on something big i’m not quite sure what, but you’ll know!!you suck at reviewing… WALL-E PWNS you to the max!!
— Rian 06/25/2008 09:32 PM #
Terrible review. That is all.. really.
— Bobby b 06/25/2008 09:33 PM #
I think I found out why he didnt like the movie, I think he didnt saw the same one as every others critics in the country who think Wall-E is a piece of art and one of the top movie of this year. It’s either that, or you are simply one of the worst critics I’ve seen in a very long time.
— Mark A. 06/25/2008 09:54 PM #
Did a stranger touch you in the potty place during a screening of “Toy Story” or something? That’s the only explanation I can think of for your irrational view of Pixar films. “When A Stranger Calls” gets a pass? “10,000 BC”?! Someone needs to revoke your professional critic privileges.
— Graham B 06/25/2008 10:00 PM #
Yawn. Obviously he gives Pixar films bad reviews because he wants people to notice him (poor guy). Take a look at the number of comments here as opposed to those of other reviewers. When I read a review I always take into account who the person is reviewing it (remember when Columbia Pictures actually invented fake reviewer names for their ad copy a few years ago?) So just pity this guy and let him have his two seconds in the spotlight. Everyone knows he’s a joke. I guess it’s easier to write a trash review than to have to appear on Jerry Springer.
— Stephen P 06/25/2008 10:32 PM #
Congratulations; your a cynical idiot with the good taste and attention span of an inbred trailer teen.
— William B 06/25/2008 10:45 PM #
You know you’re in trouble when my 3 year old understood the movie, and yet you didn’t Phil.
Of course, you also gave Jackass 4 of 4 stars, so that speaks volumes to your intellectual capacity.
— Sqwid 06/25/2008 10:48 PM #
Phil – do you get SPAM like this often?
This is great!
— Phillip L 06/25/2008 10:59 PM #
I swear to god man you are a complete moron. I hope you get fired cause you are obviosly not good at your job. Sure you’re supposed to give criticism, but you’re also supposed to give a fair one. You obviously have something against PIXAR and for you to use your position as a stepping stone for your own Agenda is simply irresponsible. I really hope your editor reads all these comments and fires your @ss.
— John 06/25/2008 11:00 PM #
I’ve been complaining about this retard for years and I’m seriously sick of him. A good review for “The Happening”? Really Phil? You suck at your job and you need to hang yourself. This guy needs to be fired and then beaten with a pillowcase full of bars of soap.
— nick 06/26/2008 01:04 AM #
Come on, guys. It’s not like his opinion is relevant or anything. I mean, look at the publication – the Arizona Daily Star. Who here has even heard of this non-news source (be honest).
It’s likely that this woe-ridden paper has a hard enough time finding someone who even wants to spend his or her time chugging out movie reviews that are intended for no one. The only reason why we even looked at the review is because it’s a pockmark on an otherwise perfect-10 Pixar film.
The truth is, this guy’s entitled to his own opinion. Even if he takes his personal tastes and injects it into the review. Even if his department can only afford a webcam from the ’90s for the video review. Even if he embarrassingly tries to graft words like “resplendent” into sentences.
— Eric 06/26/2008 01:21 AM #
Suck on massive black cock, you douchebag.
I’ll be shitting on your grave.
P.S. get your head out of your ass when you’re reviewing.
P.P.S. You like dick.
— Bitter the Jew 06/26/2008 01:27 AM #
“Hi, I’m Phil Villarreal, it’s not that I have no taste, I reviewed this movie this way because I want attention. Maybe I’ll get to be mentioned in the Buzz! on Yahoo or on Extra! as the ass who gave Wall-E a bad review while using “big” words like a jackass.”
I mean really, you used resplendent in a negative review. That is just plain jackassery.
— Jack 06/26/2008 02:22 AM #
Um, why does he have to be a “douche” for not liking this movie? Or not agreeing with you? Really, I can’t believe the comments on here. First of all, the purpose of a film CRITIC is to CRITIQUE films. Films, like all other art forms, are meant to spark discussion. Without a reaction to them, what purpose do they serve? Nobody has the same reaction. And I’m not sure what’s more maddening — the fact that he has a point about Wall-E existing less for entertainment and more for critics, that he’s saying what others are thinking and would never say out loud, or that 95% of the negative comments on here are coming from assholes who haven’t even seen the film yet…and if u claim otherwise, chances are you’re LYING. And the fact that there are so many bitter, Pixar cock-riding sheep that are so completely offended by this review makes me respect it even more. Pixar is a little overrated…GET OVER IT. His opinion is HIS OPINION, and if u don’t like it, you can go get ass raped by Al Gore.
— Matthew 06/26/2008 02:47 AM #
moron. douche. asswipe. loner. dumb shit.
— brad 06/26/2008 05:00 AM #
This whole page is full of idiots with a side of epic phail.
First:The movies this guy passes is truly strange and I doubt Ill trust his review anyway.
Second:Who here has even seen the movie anyway.
Third:Plots are different but possibly could be inspired from short circuit.
fourth:Watch ur language ppls
fifth:Are u actually reading this? You must be very bored.
sixth: making phun of his paper even though you’ve never read it.
seventh: Stephen and his excessive bolding
eigth:using ph instead of F, making long lists, and watching Jay Leno is fun.
ninth:Do you guys fantasize about his parents touching him or what, sheesh.
and tenth:boy this post is long. Maybe it is the worst thing on this page. I should end this.
P.S. You “accidentally” deleted your review. WTF!?
— Some Guy 06/26/2008 05:03 AM #
Not only was your review dull and terse, you managed to ruin a large chunk of the story line. Kudos!
— newty 06/26/2008 05:43 AM #
@Some Guy:
1. No-one cares.
2. People have seen WALL-E at an advanced screening. (I hope Matthew’s reading this)
3. What the hell has Jay Leno got to do with anything?
4. I was bored when reading your comment.
5. Putting the dumber things in your comment (e.g. “Stephen and his excessive bolding”) and using “ph” instead of “f” ain’t gonna get you anywhere.
6. I agree with the 10th part. It IS the worst on the page.
7. I’m proud to be an “idiot”, thank you very much.
— Max 06/26/2008 05:47 AM #
It’s people like you who ruin the movie industry. Even Roeper gave it a great rating. How can you be taken seriously if you don’t appreciate great movies?
— Andrew H 06/26/2008 05:50 AM #
Thank You Max. You totally didnt understand the point of my post. Here are some comebacks to all your comments
1:Obviously, you care
2:I meant the ppl posting the comments, we know most have not seen it
3:You didnt understand the point of my original post and if you did you would understand why he is so important
4:That was a hard comeback wasnt it? Practically gave it to you on a silver platter
5:“Same as No. 3”
6:Obviously you are joking with the post such as, and I qoute, “You can go get ass raped by Al Gore.”
7:I’m glad to hear that!
BTW if you didn’t get it by now. Most of my original post was a big joke.
— Some Guy 06/26/2008 06:19 AM #
Phil Villarreal’s review of Wall-E is about to send anyone who sees the film through the roof.
I read the review twice (likely once more than you) and I can’t get past the lack of genuine introspection and consideration that you failed to give this movie. Stating that Wall-E “(Is) not a thrill ride” is like saying “The God Father” wasn’t hilarious. Wall-E isn’t a movie that hits you over the head with antics, there’s a story going on here that’s both poignant and endearing to adults and wide-eyed fascinating to younger viewers. This isn’t a movie that will necessarily stick to your funnybone but it will, at least for ninety minutes, become part of your soul.
To further confound your opinions, your video review states that the film is “visually resplendent” which, when I was going to college meant, “radiant” and dazzling” yet drags too much at times.
Also, Mr. Villarreal you say, “Wall-E has the silent clown sensibilities of Buster Keaton.” I heartily agree, and although I wouldn’t go ahead and call your comment plagiarism in the first degree, it is interesting to me that even the New York Daily News attributed that same comment to it’s original source which was the studio press kit.
I did get something distinctly refreshing out of this review however, and it was the realization that Mr. Villarreal is clearly one of those reviewers who deliberately go against the grain in the hopes that his lack of original thought will provoke the ire of the reader, or, be that special someone who gives a rave review to a real stinker in the hopes that he’ll find his name under a blurb in a full-page studio ad. I can see it now, Phil Villareal call’s “National Lampoon Gold Digger’s II” the funniest movie since Caddy Shack, more exciting that “Die Hard” and more heart warming than “Old Yeller.” Gimme me a break.
— Ken Reed 06/26/2008 07:28 AM #
This is why mexicans shouldn’t do reviews freaking tool
— Mark 06/26/2008 07:39 AM #
Mark, I hope that wasn’t serious? The guy’s a joke of a critic, but the cat’s out of the bag. No need to stoop to his level (ignorance).
— Vince Faiola 06/26/2008 08:49 AM #
hahaha, he is just mad because this is job and he sucks at it and he may lose it! Haha, have fun at the homeless shelter loser.
— Sam 06/26/2008 09:22 AM #
Phil Villafake’s quote of the day:
“Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!”
— Greg Stevens 06/26/2008 09:30 AM #
Wow, GREAT REVIEW!
Haven’t laughed this much since “40 year old Virgin!” Didn’t realize fake reviews were allowed on the site…
— Chaz 06/26/2008 09:42 AM #
Don’t you know you’re not allowed to mildly disapprove of a Pixar movie? GOsh!!1!
I’m gonna go over to Rotten Tomatoes, where your review is currently listed as the only ‘rotten’ one, and copy/paste a bunch of talkback comments under a number of fake ‘net handles and pretend like there’s an army of people that agree with me.
I’m not going to acknowledge that your review isn’t really all that negative and that you actually say the film is visually stunning and that it will be an Oscar contender for Best Picture. Naw… I’ll just piss and moan and contemplate suicide because I just can’t deal with RT having ONE reviewer in the country that doesn’t have his/her hands cupping Wally’s balls.
Oh yeah… and Wally isn’t a Johnny 5 ripoff either.
Viva Bush!
— Juan Fakename 06/26/2008 10:04 AM #
wow, Ive never seen so many
immature “adults” argue and over react over a computer animated cartoon, you all do realize this is a movie right? its not the end of the world because one reviewer thought it was just another pixar kids movie that didnt accomplish anything. some people just have way too much time on thier hands and like to jump on the bandwagon and wine, great review phil
— Greg 06/26/2008 12:08 PM #
Tool!
— Tool Spoter 06/26/2008 02:38 PM #
Whaaaaa whaaaaaa I want attention too!!!!
You have horrible taste in film! Why are you a reviewer?
Don’t you realize that your track record is horrible? No one listens to you.
— Mark 06/27/2008 08:56 AM #
I knew Mark in high school and he had to sit down to piss.
— Matt 06/27/2008 10:41 AM #
Mark likes to do gay sex, I know this because my friend Brady was gay and told me.
— Ryan 06/27/2008 02:18 PM #
Oh my god, this is the same guy who gave Ratatouille a bad review, and he gave “The Crappening” a good review.
I do not rely on your reviews.
— Alex 06/28/2008 09:37 AM #
Seriously, you’re the worst reviewer ever. You need to get fired or die, one or the other.
— Joe 06/28/2008 04:38 PM #
Great ! Phil, you are the only one, so You are the greatest ! The film is a leftist propaganda pro-Global Warming ! Dangerous for kids ! We will protest here in Italy when the film will be issue next October. I will translate your review in Italian in my blog http://ambientalismodirazza.blogspot.com/
— No Algore 08/03/2008 12:04 AM #