Thursday, 6 May 2010

Contains Traces Of Blog

Time was, way back in the day, that simply giving a film a certificate (U, PG, 12, 15 or 18, those are your basics) was sufficient to give people ample warning as to the level of suitable content within a film. But no, for some unfathomable reason, we're increasingly given weirdly specific-seeming descriptions that do, in fact, give you no real information as to what you're going to encounter ("mild peril" being a particularly useless favourite - although I have to admit that "fantasy spiders" does leave little room for interpretation). So I thought it was time we were given some actually useful descriptions which may help us all decide whether or not to watch a film. Here area few examples:-

Summer Blockbuster CGI-Fest
- Contains 80% CGI, 18% shouting and 2% acting

Harry Potter And The Endless Franchise
- Contains characters using the full name "Harry Potter" throughout the entire film just in case you forgot who the speccy kid was

Generic 80s Horror Film Remake Part 3
- Contains nothing that you liked about the original

Michael Bay's KickExplodeFightBoom
- Contains 73 explosions in super slow motion and no need for cognitive reasoning.

Any Film Starring Or Even Featuring Or Just Mentioning Hugh Grant
- Contains a vomit-inducing amount of Hugh Grant*

Any more for any more?

*OK, that one may be a specifically personal bugbear


cerebus660 said...

Rom-Com Barf-A-Thon

Contains possibly over-the-hill "kooky" actress being extremely bitchy to young, puppy-dog-eyed actor for most of film, until last scene mushiness conquers all. Warning: Not suitable for middle-aged men or anyone with functioning intelligence chip.

That Baldy Fella said...

Definitely a warning that I would find useful. Although the standard "white poster" that seems to the default for the rom-com these days is quite often warning enough...