Skip to main content

"50/50" - Critics love it, but a few individuals whom haven't seen it refuse to do so because...

So, I just got back home from seeing the film "50/50," which just started airing in theaters today. I saw a preview for this a while back and immediately knew I wanted to see it. As far contemporary actors go, Joseph Gordon-Levitt ranks very highly for me and continues to climb the ladder. It seems that most people know this actor as the guy from the tv show, "3rd Rock From the Sun". He's done a bit since then. The only problem being that he's been the focal point of mainly independent films, which critics have hailed, but which haven't received much attention otherwise. These films include: "Brick," "Mysterious Skin," "The Lookout," etc. He also played a part in the smash hit, "Inception" and really hit it big as far as lesser-name films are concerned with his lead in "(500) Days of Summer". So, when I heard of him playing the lead character in a dramedy regarding a man battling cancer, I knew I was going to have to check it out at the theater.

Critics have hailed this film. As of this moment at RottenTomatoes.com, the film has generated 99 positive reviews and 9 negative, for a 92% grade and an average score of around 8 out of 10. Having just seen this film, I'd have to say I agree with the majority of the critics. It was not a perfect film. I actually think it could have benefited from a bit longer of a script to generate stronger character development, especially if the film was simply a drama. However, since it attempted and largely succeeded in incorporating humor into the drama, perhaps condensing the feature was the right thing to do. In any case, it's an at times very funny film and yet very heart-wrenching and powerful. It's quite the balancing act to successful integrate a rather large quantity of jokes in a film centered around a person battling cancer, but this film pulled it off as well as it possibly could. I strongly recommend seeing this film.

Just before I left for the theater, I checked out the film's page at IMDb.com and read through some posts. I could not believe how many people made posts such as this, "Cancer is not funny! I can't believe there's a movie out which makes fun of cancer! I'm not going to see this!" or "This movie is a slap in the face to people who have cancer!" or "No one in this movie knows what it's like to face cancer! Nobody! Hollywood is trying to make a quick buck off of cancer!" ...and so it goes...

Alright, well, I hate to sound condescending, but are people really that stupid? Do they seriously believe that Hollywood would release a picture with its central focus being to make fun of cancer and of a person battling the illness? I don't think so. Who would sign up for and release that? No one that I know. What these imbeciles don't realize is based on a true story about Will Reiser, the film's writer! That's right. The WRITER of this film and his battle with cancer is who and what this film is about. So, no one in the film knows what dealing with cancer is like? Actually... So, it's this guy's story. He's the one whom had to endure the illness. None of us know what it was like to experience what he did. We'll never be able to garner his exact perspective of what all transpired. Why in the world some would believe that a writer of a film, whom the story is based upon, would poke fun of the illness that almost killed him is beyond me. Ah, how about watching the movie before making such asinine allegations? That always seems to do the trick.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"