Papa’s Basement Radio Show 3-21-2013-Are You Socially Horrible?
After a night on the town, John asks himself…is he honest to god a social retard and is there any help for him? We also get into discussing the recent […]
Not to let the cat out of the bag, but I use Rotten Tomatoes aggregate rating for a movie as a guideline for how my reviews are going to go. And that’s why Spring Breakers has me somewhat confused: With a current score of 69 (haha) percent, it probably isn’t terrible. So it’s with an almost heavy heart that I have to pan it anyhow.
Because Spring Breakers isn’t going to deliver what the audience wants: All four of these broads (who represent a collective 360 pounds of vagina and ribs) naked and going to town on one another. In fact, I’d settle for the two famous ones (the gals with the same skin tone as the maids that raised the white ones) naked. That’s the bare minimum to get my ticket money. And while the director does decide to give us the boobs of one Vanessa Hudgens, we’ve been there and done that already. Plus, don’t boobs have to be a certain size to count as fuul boobs? She has boos. Maybe just bos.
On top of that, there’s James Franco donging up the whole Sapphic production as a K-Fed-esque wigger. (Being white, I can say that. It’s ours. The rest of you have to refer to it as “the w-word”.) I haven’t heard one in-character syllable escape his child of privilege lips, but it’ll be the worst accent since Jar Jar Binks.
Skip Spring Breakers. When a movie flaunts sex without delivering, it deserves to be stoned to death like a Muslim woman that accidentally looked at a poster of David Beckham. This is one film where the porn parody is guaranteed to be a thousand times better. Well, this and My Dinner With Andre.
Post comments (0)