Amazon.com Knee-Jerk Contrarian Game

Books
King James Bible, both new and old testament

• Apart from the leather, this book isn't really any good


• do you really have to read it all to realize that it's all make beleive?


• This was the worst piece of fiction I've ever read. The characters were cliched and their actions were just unbelievable. A total piece of trash.

Ernest Hemmingway - The Old Man & the Sea

• This book sucks. Only a depressed person would like this book. The old man is lonely and keeps trying to fish but doesn't catch any. It's like that old saying, if you put your mind to it you can accomplish anything, but this old man failed. Only a depressed person would like it

• Well, I whole-heartedly agree with the New York Times' review. As a very liberal paper, called the NY Slimes in my household, I was very suprised with the bad review. I decided to see for myself. But yes, the book was long, drawn-out, and full of lies. Bill Clinton has to be one of the most self-centered people that has ever written a book. Don't bother to read this unless you would like to just get angry. Also, don't waste your money. Actually, don't waste your time either. Just don't read this book.
• Bill Clinton is a disgrace to this country. He is a true liar and a cheat, He is trying to sell you 900 pages of pure **** and if you want to hear about his sexual "experiances" with monica then you are some kind of pervert.You people are influenced by bias media coverage. If you really want to know what's going on I recomend that you whatch FOX news and listin to Sean Hannity.
• Like a week-old diaper. This is just to counter all the five star reviews from liberals who couldn't read it if they wanted to, thanks to a school system populated with people more interested in indoctrination and Affirmative Action quotas, then in actaully teaching.
  

Norah Jones, "Come Away With Me"

• Puke, puke, puke. Can you hear me puke. This is 100% rectum. Her dull voice bodes poorly with the cheesy backing music. Sounds like a bad night club singer.


• My coworkers won't let me play it because they insist that it sounds like my CD player is broken and playing the same song over and over and it puts them to sleep.


• Her voice is so dull and boring! She looks boring. Boring Norah for a boring album.


• A bright and shining piece of mediocrity, well produced but shallow and emotionally constrained. The kind of pointless superficially impressive fluff used in demonstrations at audio shows and the like.

Neuromancer by William Gibson

• Read 2 chapters and call me in the morning. Zzzzz...
• I had to read this piece of garbage in college. It is absolute drivel. That's all.
• Neuromancer is an uninteresting, unimaginative and ultimately daft book whose inexplicable popularity is just further evidence that the tendency to mistake opacity for profundity is becoming as common in fiction as it is in literary criticism. Truly dreadful.
• Hey! I've got an idea. Why don't I write a book in which I hide behind technological jargon so people have no idea what the plot is?

2001 - A Space Odyssey

• "For the reviewers commenting that the 'director wants the viewer to use his/her brain' I say that movies are a form of entertainment and should not leave the viewer with to much to think about."


• "You know how some people buy paintings that are nothing but splashes of paint and think it's cool? That's probably the same kind of people that like this movie."


• "I don't understand half the movie and in order to understand even half of it you have to watch 2010 you'd have to be high to like this movie or very stupid fittingly my roomate liked it because he is both maybe thats the reason I don't understand this movie because i'm not some stupid stoner man this movie is horrible and if i was a POW and someone made me watch this movie as toucher i'd tell them anything cause this movie is tourture the only thing good about it is the special effects and that song The Blue Danube thats it don't waste your time or money unless you run a POW camp then you'd probably like this movie remember jsut guard your eyes or your tourchering yourself to man this movie sucks"

The Lord of the Rings - The Return of the King

• haven't read these books. Sorry to disappoint. Orcs with downs syndrome and overacting hobbits that should still be starring in the movie of the week don't entice me either
• We live in a world of avant-twits. Peter Jackson should be ashamed to take something this great and re-constitute so he could sell it to all the freaks to lazy to read the book.
• I don't know why everyone loves these movies. They are a bunch of stupid gothic ghosts and goblins. It's the oldest premise for a movie ever. I hate these movies. They are so overrated, it boggles the mind. I'd rather have both my arms ripped off and beat with them unmercifully than have to watch another one of these movies.
• I found myself overcome with nausea upon viewing this film. I must say, the performances of each and every one of the actors and actresses were woeful, and truly disturbing, in the least. How this truly awful film came to win so many Academy Awards (TM) remains but a cryptic occurence in a world copious with hate. The excessive length induced a severe bowel movement, which eventually forced me to miss the last hour and tweleve minutes in the cinema loo.
• this is almost four hours of utter ennui. People seem to enjoy this only because other people seem to enjoy this. To give this an Oscar once again shows that Hollywood is a total self-flattering piece of joke.
• I could go on for hours about why I abhor this waste of celluloid, but for those who enjoy this tripe it would make no difference. So I'll spare you all the rant. In one word, though, to describe my overall impression of this film, I would have to say I find it impossibly "tacky." Tacky tacky tacky tacky tacky

Leaves of Grass:

1. I will never read this now. But I might give a copy to some gal so I can get laid. Ummmm, y-e-e-e-s!

2. Whitman's descriptions of nature are inspired and his style exudes with the same passion as his subject. Yet, his self-absorption overshadows his talent. Whitman's poem, "Song of Myself" takes up a significant portion of the book, Leaves of Grass. Here, Whitman keeps no points in reserve, but spends 52 sections "celebrating" himself. He feels he, as man, is the great panacea. He suckles at its mercy until it fills not only his subject matter, but influences his technique and his structure as well. His intriguing mind leads the reader along, until disappointment is found in another laborious passage expounding god status and the call to ascend to his level of distorted thinking. Whitman's momentary descriptive nuggets are lost in a sea of narcissism.

3. Although he may be as genius as he is, Walt Whitman is just random. His structure and development are atrocious, leaving us in a cloud of confusion. His lists, names, and metaphors can only be described as random thought. And don't even get me started on his comma use. That's how my little sister writes for crying out loud! I mean, don't you remember? You'd get lucky if you found an "and" in there somewhere. Granted, he did revolutionize poetry and writing as we know it. However, certain selections for his ever famous Song of Myself show that he can sure describe those bodily actions that he seems to love so much. I can cut him some slack, probably because he's a romantic writer, but his random stringing of words, phrases, and lists do his poetry injustice. Poor Jonathon Edwards would be turning in his grave...

4. It's sad that the way in which I happened upon this group of poems is by reading an article in today's New York Post that lists this a one of Clinton's gifts to his lovely Monica- An American Treasure given to an American Tramp.

5.

Oh, nicely done.

Lawrence of Arabia

• I was looking for reviews for this particular CD and all I see are reviews for the DVD. Oh, well. I didn't rate this CD with a single star--Amazon forced me to put something there. Again with the "oh, well."


• I bought this DVD as a way to show off my new DVD player to my family. I had seen the movie several times in the theater, and knew its bright colors would be beautiful on my TV screen.

To my horror, I saw that Columbia had seen fit to alter a masterpiece. Yes, the film came complete with those horrific black bars at the top and bottom of my screen, which obscured about half of the picture. I've seen those bars on the "artsy" videos on TV, and I sometimes enjoy them. But this is a classic work of art! You don't try to make it "hip" and "relevant" with modern touches. It would be like adding a moustache to the Mona Lisa.

Until Columbia drops the act and releases "Lawrence of Arabia" without those bars, letting us see all of the picture, stay away.

I had to see what people thought of my favorite book...

Catch-22

-"The writing is incredibly long-winded (he needed to EDIT, he needed a COMPUTER) and Heller always chooses the MORE OBSCURE word over the more ACCESSIBLE, STUPIDER (Heller probably thought) word."

-"This book could have been summed up in one chapter, and in all its wordiness the only point is that war is extremely boring."

-"I always wanted to read Catch 22 because it was a famous book (and of course the term was used in a Metallica song)."

Hilarious!

Too easy, and too funny!

Seven Samurai

• Save your money and time by not watching this badly made kung-fu movie. The guys in this movie do not know martial arts at all.
• This movie seems to be a scene-by-scene copy of one of my favorite movies-"Magnificent Seven". Magnificent seven is a classic movie that has been copied many times, but I didn't know westerns were popular enough in japan to be copied.
• no special effects at all. This movie could learn some tricks from the recent movie "The haunting".

Nirvana: Nevermind

• This is a stinking pile of putrid trash. I hate everyone who was in this band with all my heart.
• In all honesty, though, if this music is the best you have to be nostalgic about, you might as well shoot yourself.

Pink Floyd: Dark Side of the Moon

• Britney will be criticized now, but she will be around forever and follow the path of the total musical genius Madonna.
• pink floyd is for old people.

The Philadelphia Story

• An unmitigated disaster - and I speak as someone with great affection for vintage film, comedy in general and these actors specifically. I'm not entirely surprised that THE PHILADELPHIA STORY garners the absurd high praise that it does, though. Every aspect of the play and film is utterly phony, but in that high-minded, self-congratulatory manner that appeals to middlebrow audiences who point to films like this as emblems of their own good taste ... there's a reason THE PHILADELPHIA STORY is rarely, if ever, revived as a stage property: it's horribly false and condescending, and one could single out the phonies in the audience with ease - they'd be the only ones laughing, while the majority of the attendants would punctuate their long silences with nervous coughing between impatient glances at their watches.


• Katherine Hepburn is not funny at all, when she tries to be funny it does not come through as natural and one gets the impression that she is just trying to be cute. Cary Grant was much better in later films, as in to Catch a Thieve, and Charade. Jimmy Steward was the only one that stands out. (sic)


• Slow-moving movie about a lot of people who think they're clever.

Spiderman

• Worthless big-screen updating of the classic character suffers from lousy plotting and boring execution. This waste of time has all the depth of a comic book, and succeeds only in trashing a famous character's legacy and blowing a lot of stuff up. The ending is particularly ludicrous. Count me as one who will not be in line for the sequel to this stinker.


• Let's just hope they won't make more of these or give it to someone with a little more depth. If you want to see a really good superhero-movie try Ang Lee's the Hulk.


• If the comic book were as bad as this movie, the movie would have never been made. The only thing in this movie that I can remember is that the Green Goblin looks like Donald Rumsfeld. Other than that, its a yawner.

My friend and I have been doing this for years. Some of our reviews of Homer:

Review of http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0374525749/qid=1000442750/sr=8-1/ref=aps_sr_b_1_1/107-3725577-0880546

Yet more Hollywood Pabulum (reviewer from Overarch Ace)

Though Fitzgerald is a competent translator of Homer's Spike-Lee influenced [Aeolian], the disappointing truth is you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. Homer would be best left outside the circle of his fellow Greeks Sophocles and Plato and re-establish himself as a writer for SNL or maybe Married with Children. Were Homer alive today hew would no doubt be plotting out the next Buffy the Vampire Slayer storyboard as we speak. Those who know the original Greek can feel the harsh dissonance of Homer's words echoing in Fitzgerald. English has blunted some of the edges, but the overall horrific effect of Homer's screeches and moans is too evil to killed, yet too sinister to be contemplated.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060931957/qid=1000443207/sr=2-2/107-3725577-0880546

Another Blatant Gilgamesh Ripoff (from Babylon, Mes)

I curse the gift of sight which makes it possible for me to read these words. Riddled with lame and unconvincing characters, schticky plot-twists, and a second rate d&d fantasy land, Homer's text reads like a 6th grader's unsaved Final Fantasy quest. This overrated yawn-fest has made its mark on history not through its qualities but by its lack of them. The ages stand in awe of this stupendous work of anti-art which yet casts its sick shadow. Phear!

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0140268863/qid=1000443369/sr=8-3/ref=aps_sr_b_1_3/107-3725577-0880546

Are they still talking about this guy? (reviewer from Geigh, Boy)

Same old junk in a shiny new suit. Fagles valiantly tries to infuse some life into Homer's flop-tastic epic, with the addendum of a chase sequence and the flashback to Odysseus' birthday party at the county fair, one cannot help but feel these a bit contrived - like ruffling papers to hide a fart. We still smell you, Homer, and you still stink.

It is not the fault of the translator - a golden temple cannot be built on blocks of excrement.

Pink Floyd - Dark Side of the Moon

• THIS ISbad= ELEVATOR[music], its really a bunch of Nursery ryhmed jingles jangles water down barry manillow progressive going MINDLESS, simmilar to what happened to genesis. MUSIC FOR the big shell out , cynically canned and packaged for THEconsuming uninformed, THIS IS radio friendly album oriented mediocrity at its blandess.


• It just struck me, after decades of being baffled and angered by the popularity of this album, that it isn't about the music, it's about the silence. Don't bother with the songs, listen to the gaps between them, between the ticks of the clock. It's well served by the CD format where the gaps are more pristene and devoid of clicks, but I imagine fans miss the old days of laying around waiting for someone to turn the album over.

Fight Club(movie)

• I purchased this special edition thinking it would have 6.1 sound to drive my rear speakers. Even though many sites indicate there is 6.1 sound, it is not so. This movie runs about an hour too long. The twist is given away early in the movie on the airplane "Hey, I have the same briefcase". I found this movie boring and resold it used, at a minimal loss. I could barely make it through the movie and did not waste any time on the commentaries. This rates with The Mexican on my sleep list. Seven is much better and has much better sound....


• The most famous line from the movie 'Fight Club' is, 'The first rule about Fight Club is that you do not talk about Fight Club.' After watching the movie, I can't help but ask, 'Why would anyone want to??'


• Fight club is one of the most over hyped movies that I have ever seem.

Stupid plot. Stupid plot. Stupid plot. Stupid plot. Stupid plot.

Pass on this movie. Don't waste your money.

• 
  Slim Pickens riding the bomb is a reference that is part of the American culture. Other than knowing the origin of this reference, this movie is a waste of time.


• THIS MOVIE IS PRETTY BAD. GOOD ACTING THOUGH

• 
  This film is so boring and in the shower scene it was obviously Bates the wig even from shadow was awful. SEE THE REMAKE FAR MORE ENTERTAINING!


• This has got to be the worst movie ever. A plot about a guy that keeps his dead mother's body around and kills people in the shower. Lame

• 
  This movie is very boring and is quite pointless. Why does he write 'All work and no play makes Johnny a dull boy'? It is very very slow moving and not many will get the whole plot, as they might forget most of what happened before the movie is over and will have to watch it again to 'get it'. Kids 11-15 will be bored out of their wits! This is definately a movie directed at older auidences, as they will understand the plot better. I was not scared at all! I've seen bunny masks scarier than this sad excuse for a movie.


• THIS MOVIE IS HORRIBLE. IT SUCKS BIG FAT FURRY ASS. JUST LOOK AT THE COVER. THAT EXPLAINS IT ALL!!! HES A SUPER FREAK!!! SUPER FREAK!!!

Simpsons: The Complete First Season

• "What is this!?!?! Homer Simpson acts like Yoge Bear!!!! The animation has to be the worst animation I have ever seen!!!!! Come on!!!!"
• "OH GOD! WHAT HAPPENED? DID THE CREATORS KNOW WHAT THEY WERE PUTTING OUT? I DIDN'T LAUGH ONCE AND I AM A SIMPSONS FAN."
• "I love the Simpsons, and it pains me to give this DVD a bad rating but, it is the worst DVD ever."

Godel, Escher, Bach

• This is one of the better ones, both a review of the book and a review of a review of a review:

  "I think Steve Keppel-Jones has missed the point of the previous reviewer.

  Steve says self-rep and self-ref depend not an outside observer but on the properties of the system itself. But that's an example of the same sort of hand-waving the earlier reviewer was talking about: an isomorphism (a mathematical version of 'resemblance') isn't the same thing as a reference. (In some respects Kilamanjaro resembles Everest, and Everest Kilamanjaro; do the two mountains therefore *mean* each other?)

  Hofstadter and Keppel-Jones are implicitly relying here on a thoroughly discredited 'picture theory of meaning' dressed up in mathematical language. Isomorphisms do indeed require minds in order to count as references, and - as the earlier reviewer said - there must be a mind in the system already in order for this to occur within the system itself. Otherwise the 'meaning' is imported from an observer outside the system.

  By the way, if Hofstadter claims that consciousness doesn't require simulation of the neuronal level, then doesn't that mean self-rep and self-rep *are* sufficient conditions for consciousness to occur? Or is he speaking only of 'simulated consciousness' (whatever that might be)?

  What, in short, does Keppel-Jones mean in saying that 'mind can be *represented* by symbol-manipulating systems'? Is this more hand-waving?"

• And it looks like somebody got his doctorate in the humanities! This a mound of name dropping and "appeal to" arguments. I like how he inserts himself ("My own publications...") into the review:

  "After hearing for years effusive praise heaped on this book by one reviewer/reader after the other, I thought I'd better look at it. Now,we are living in an age that "naturalizes" everything, that treats virtually all issues (including, e.g., the nature of consciousness, perception, language, self), all topics, all domains, as formalizable and treatable by some version or variety of natural sciences/math. (See, for example, the thinking, "research", and practices in current mainstream psychiatry.) Nevertheless, there is a good deal of impressive, very well informed minority literature that counters this trend--one which, according to some, started in ancient Greece and got its major boost in the Cartesian era. (My own publications have dealt with this issue peripherally, and I'm currently at work on a ms. that makes it central.) Apart from several rather lame discussions of Zen and of the limitations of logic and formalisms, Hofstadter's book is predicated on the veneration of formalization. I propose that it plays into the rampant societal pathology of abuse and inappropriate veneration of rationality--an abuse, I might add, which is also accompanied by its opposite polarity, a non-thinking mindlessness, an infantile way of operating. This polarized pathology devalues, ignores, misses what ought to be central to our lives--matters related to what the Jungian James Hillman somewhat ponderously calls our "soul". Hence, my hatred of this pretentious, smug work, and its collusion with scientism."

This is fun. Last one:
Gandhi

• "This movie was not made as any tribute, so matter what anyone says. This movie was made to MAKE $$$$$$"
• "this movie is the worst movie I have ever seen. and the acting please"
• "This film is full of other historical inaccuracies and a good prpaganda for Indian government riding on Gandhi's popularity all over the world"

Deliverance

wasnt too bad actually pretty decent until the great climax of horror that no other man should have to see with his own eyes neither be owned or played on my tv. it left me dissappointed and wishing i never saw it. but i wont ruin it for you if you wanna know go ask someone.

Requeim for a Dream

Sure to make you want to turn the director upside down and shake him to get your money back. I honestly think this jack ass director only made this movie to degrade poor Jennifer Connelly. There is no point to this sadistic trash. Scenes of shooting up into an arm with gangrene that is eventually sawed off, Prostitution, vomiting, electro shock, stabbings, shootings and infantile over use of camera tricks insures bad times. No story or plot here. zero stars.

Mulholland Drive

• I felt like I was watching "Bewitched" when they switched Darren's and didn't tell anyone.
  
• You only become more confused and irritated.
  

  
  Another thing we weren't expecting was that this movie had lesbian love scenes and also a masturbation sequence. Overall, the movie was nothing we expected and we plan never to watch it again.
  
  

• absolutely hated this movie. This rambling, pointless, incoherent piece of garbage wasted 147 minutes of my life. At no point did this movie attempt to tell a coherent story. If you haven't seen this movie, you already know more about it than you will after you have watched it. Mulholland Drive is a well-acted, well-directed, and well-filmed drug induced hallucination. If you like a movie that tells a story, or at least tries to make some sort of sense, stay away from this one.
• Before I saw this film, I honestly thought I couldn't hate a movie more than I hated Armageddon. Boy was I wrong!
  

Chinatown

While most critics laud CHINATOWN as the best film in Polanski's career, I find it probably his worst. Polanski once claimed that this film was inspired by Howard Hawks' 1945 classic, THE BIG SLEEP, but he obviously has made a serious mistake in his job of imitation. In THE BIG SLEEP, the detective Humphrey Bogart is a friend of Lauren Bacall's father, and this is how he gets himself involved. Bacall's father trusts Bogart! But in CHINATOWN, Polanski seems to have completely forgotten the importance of such human relationship. In the first place, the setting is all wrong. Jack Nicholson is a nobody; Faye Dunaway is a woman with a very complicated background; John Huston is her monstrous father. Such relationship makes Dunaway's approach to Nicholson totally unconvincing. ... Huston is a beast who has designed the most complicated and clever plot. Witty it may seem, but is it really? .... The ending simply contradicts everything previously told in the film. In other words, this film is a mistake from the beginning to the end, and to award this film an Oscar for the best screenplay was the greatest mistake on earth! Was the Academy blind or something!

The French Connection

C'mon people! How fun is it to watch a racist, lewd, borrish, and dumb person beating up people for no f-----g reason. As little as possible. All the film does is show two unorthadox sleep in car all night, hold up bars just because there are black people there, and reapeatedly getting the same food as 24 minutes ago. And a point that should go out, THERE IS NO CAR CHASE! Just someone chasing a train! I will end by saying that this trashy film deserved no oscars! BYE!

The Godfather

"The Godfather" has an ugly consciousness and a mean spirit. I see no justification for it, thoroughly disliked it, and have tried to forget it.

Abbey Road



I bought this album because I totally thought the guy on the right was Kate Hudson's husband. So I mean, I THOUGHT I was scoring some QUALITY stoner grooves or like, something kinda White Stripey.



Dude, was I wrong.



Like, are there ANY phat beats on this thing? Um, NO--I heard they don't tour at all--I bet they can't dance, 'cause not one of their boy band harmonies has a kickin' beat behind it, so what's the point?



And what's with the look? I mean, dude, hit a gymn already, and like, catch Queer Eye like even once, and get some product in your hair.



And those lyrics...they don't take it from the streets to the suburbs (props to Eminem) or the suburbs to the suburbs (shout out to tha Kid)--in fact THEY DON'T RAP AT ALL. I Want You (She's So Heavy)--I mean, sure we all want the hot girl, but do you have to make the other girl who's fat feel bad by telling her that? Too cold. And what's with Carry That Weight--is the guy going with the fat girl after all, or has he gotten fat himself? Confusing. Give Me "your body is a wonderland" any day.



Speaking of heavy, forget slammin' tracks--these guys are ENGLISH, so they don't hit it like like Korn or Limp Bizkit or Phantom Planet. And okay, yeah, Sun King was kind of cool to chill to, but it would be better if it lasted like, twenty minutes with the same downbeats going all the way through--you can't get halfway through your doobie before the song is like, over. And Polythene Pam right after? Freaked me out, man.



So, in summary, check out a real band like Incubus.

Schindler's List

• we watch this every christmas eve before we put the children to sleep. It is a wonderful family oriented comedy.

The Complete Works of William Shakespeare

• Guess what! This is a great book! JUST KIDDING! It's HORRIBLE! IT IS BY FAR THE WORST BOOK I HAVE READ IN MY ENTIRE LIFE! I would never, ever, ever, ever buy this book. NEVER! Oh, did I mention how bad the writing is? The writing is HORRIBLE! IT IS THE WORST WRITING THAT I HAVE READ IN MY ENTIRE LIFE! If you are bored enough to read this book, you have way too much free time and don't deserve to have the money that it costs to buy it. I really don't know why everyone says that Shakespeare is such a great writer. He isn't.
  
• Hello Shakespeare, is anyone home? Most people will say that I didn't understand this, but I totally did and it still stinks. It cannot equal the feeling I got from reading abou Frodo and Sam climbing mount doom. And the fight scenes were totally unrealistic. I'm into suspending disbelief and all, but Hamlet? Hello? Like, a ghost living? Give me Mount Doom anyday.
  

The Cat in the Hat

• Clearly the "cat in the hat" represents a satanic creature or
  symbol, whose sole purpose is the corruption and temptation of the
  children. He is DEMONIZING them! The fish represents reason and
  sensibility (God), and the author has made the cat satan... so look at
  this: Cats EAT fish!

The Sound of Music

* It's movies like this that really damage people, and turn them into namby-pamby prudish, wimpy, panty waists. If the SPCS would realize this, maybe their "job" would have some merit. Leonard Maltin claims that this movie pleased more people than any other in history. That's disturbing.

* Is it possible to contract diabetes from watching a movie? The Sound of Music comes pretty darn close! Overly sentimental pablum with unremarkable songs. Too cutesy, too long, too boring.

* This movie is really borring. Don't get me wrong I like Juile Andrews, but I find her more attractive now. I could watch Princess Diaries over and over and never get bored with her. But in this movie she looked more like Sandy Dunncen, the women from Hogen Family. She was the woman that replaced Valerie Harper after there was a problem with production. I did like Valerie better then Sandy, but I find Sandy more attactive then Valerie, but I like Julie Andrews more then both of them, but I especially like the modern Julie Andrews more now then in this movie. The only person that did a good job was James Cann. He was able to provide substance to an otherwise slow moving movie. You might remember James Cann from Roolerball and the comedy Godfather. He was good as the comic relief in that movie. I hope that he can put this movie behind him and get to more productive movies like his part in Back to the Future or Alien Nation.

I've been collecting gushy reviews of undeserving books....

"This is the best book that I have read!"

-- Nancy Drew and the Password to Larkspur Lane

"This book was one of the most interesting books i've read in my life."

-- Come and Knock on Our Door: A Her's and Her's and His Guide to the TV show Three's Company.

Great Expectations

While cultural pundits try to convince you that some literature is better than other literature, the truth is that all art is relative to individial tastes. Thus, it doesn't make any sense to think that a novel like this one is really any better than say, Michael Crichton or Stephen King. Aesthetic standards can't be grounded.

Thus, don't listen to anyone who tries to distinguish between "serious" works of literature like this one and allegedly "lesser" novels. The distinction is entirely illusory, because no novels are "better" than any others, and the concept of a "great novel" is an intellectual hoax.

if you don't like reading books with way too much detail than don't buy this book. when i was reading it i couldn't understand anything it said. if you are older maybe you wouldn't think it's boring, or if you like this author's books, but i thought it was very boring and it took me forever and a half to read.

This is an awful book. I would just assume to eat it than read it again. If you have anything better to do, don't read this book. I would give it 0 stars if I could.

Sylvia Plath's The Bell Jar

"I'm sorry, but you DO NOT kill yourself after you've had children. Sorry, but once you have kids, the suicide option is out. Tell that to Kurt Cobain and Ian Curtis and any other self-centered artist: Try being a responsible human being for a change and quit thinking only about yourself so much."

Pavement, Slanted & Enchanted

"ok, this band is not that good. Plain and Simple.
They sound like Beck trying to Cover Weezer songs!...Also, Contuid (sic) for Sale sounds like Primus, but in this case, not in a good way."

U2's Joshua Tree:
"The Joshua Tree" is without a doubt the worst album in the history of rock by the worst band in rock. Not even the Beatles are as annoying as U2.
The worst part is, every time I hear a song off "The Joshua Tree" it gets stuck in my head and it's almost impossible to purge for the rest of the day. If I want to become extremely angry or frustrated all I need to do hear a song off this album. After being tortured by this music, I need to listen to Slayer to calm down.

Led Zeppelin are the most overrated band of all time. U2 come 2nd.

Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man:
The only think this book is about is how black people were treated so badly, I don't feel bad for them because they didn't try to change it.

I think that one's a winner

Invisible man by ralph ellison gave me the worst agony of any book i've ever had to read in school. it has absolutely NO plot and it is totally biased. i hated it- and if your under the age of 65 you will too.

This book was as intellectually stimulating as watching a blind goat rape a treestump. I've never been as horrified in my life as I was by this terrible, terrible disgrace upon writing.

Gary Larson's The Complete Far Side, 1980 - 1994

- Ok, I admit I am weak. But this thing is way too heavy. Don' even think of bringing it on an airplane. Buy an IPAQ.




Pink Floyd, The Wall

- A double album!!! As if one records worth of music wasn't bad enough, Floyd have to put out a double album, to double the pain and agony that comes from listening to these guys. Again, The songs are dull and have no structure or rythm.
Since it is a double, it will probably be a little more expensive, so avoid and pick up Damita Jo and Justified for two albums of breathtaking music.

- i say the inside art to the duble LD and it sc ared me. the music didn;t help. why do bnands like being so scary?



And just for a change, a positive (if somewhat tragic) review of The Easy-Bake Master Chef Oven!

- For about six weeks, I enjoyed my Easy Bake Oven. I would offer hot baked goods to my guests, always daring them to tell me where my latest cookie or small cake came from. They never could, and stood in amazement when I informed them of the cooking power harnessed in this little machine. Needless to say, I loved it. One day, I decided to try the oven's magical powers on the perfect food, the ham-and-cheese Hot Pocket. Bad idea. After a few short minutes, my Pocket was a charred mess and the inside of the oven was coated with hot ham and cheese. It may sound delicious, but it was the final breath for my oven. It hasn't worked right since - now my guests complain that my tiny cookies and cakes "taste like meat". I don't dislike the product. On the contrary, I'll be buying another one eventually. I just dislike myself for trying to break the rules, and failing. Just like usual.

Gone With the Wind


How could anyone say this is the geatest movie of all time?! The script is absolutely corny, the whole story in general is VERY unrealistic and dumb, the acting is down right STUPID, got sooooo boring after the first 30 minutes, and speaking of minutes this worthless film is WAY to long! 4 and a half hours?!! Get real people!!! If you want to watch some REAL entertainment check out "The Matrix", "Terminator 2", "Blade", "Gladiator", or "Independence Day".

Some of those have to be jokes, e.g. The Seven Samauri: "This movie seems to be a scene-by-scene copy of one of my favorite movies-"Magnificent Seven". Magnificent seven is a classic movie that has been copied many times, but I didn't know westerns were popular enough in japan to be copied."

(of course, the influence went the other way).

Abbey Road

"I bought this album because I totally thought the guy on the right was Kate Hudson's husband. So I mean, I THOUGHT I was scoring some QUALITY stoner grooves or like, something kinda White Stripey.

Dude, was I wrong.

Like, are there ANY phat beats on this thing? Um, NO--I heard they don't tour at all--I bet they can't dance, 'cause not one of their boy band harmonies has a kickin' beat behind it, so what's the point?"

Moby Dick

To me, this isn't so much a story about an elusive, self-preserving whale who antagonized a crazy old captain on a quest for revenge, but as a 'how to' book on fishing whales.

This book is HORRIBLE! Classic, my eye! I would love to know what's so great about this book. I have seen better writing in a Hallmark card! Boring! Give me a good ole copy of Elvis and Me!

f your looking for a good book, dont read this, you will only become agitated. Such was the case with me. I am quite the fan of stories which involve man eating sea creatures, such as Jaws. Moby Dick is nothing compared to such classics, I fear.

In fact, it is boring with a capital B. What is the whales motivation? You dont know.

The Metamorphosis, Franz K

If there were a 0 star rating that's exactly what I would have given this usless, worthless, example of wasted paper. I wouldn't read this work again if I were paid one million dollars. In my opinion, it sounded like it was written by someone on weed. I say he woke up trippin and saw himself as a bug and later decided to write about it.

sh*t sandwic (sic)

1984

• 1984 is a fictional novel by George Orwell. The book is a story of Orwell's prediction of the world in the future (1984). In this story, we are taken to a society that is governed by an oppressive force known as "The Party," and an intangable ruler known only as "Big Brother." The main character, Winston Smith, spends his time throughout the novel trying to overthrow The Party and Big Brother, while running from the "Thought Police," a justice department that monitors the thoughts of citizens of Oceana, the predicted future state of London, England. Winston fails in his attempts. He is captured, set up by people whom he believed to be on his side, and is later brainwashed into loving and following Big Brother. Great attitude George. I truly believe that Orwell's sole purpose for writing this novel was to encourage anarchy, and to convince his readers to be subordinate to authority. Though society and government are not perfect, they are not as evil and as oppressive as Orwell made them out to be. He creates a negative Utopia in hopes to make people hate their leaders and to disagree with any form of government. It is because of people like Orwell that our nation, as well as other nations, are so dramatically torn by the opinions of citizens towards their leaders, and their leader's decisions. Also, at the end of this novel, Orwell leaves readers with a sense of hopelessness, by allowing his main character to be manipulated, tortured, and brainwashed into following what Orwell inderectly refers to as government. Let's try to be a little more optomistic, and work on a happier ending, shall we?
• While cultural pundits try to convince you that some literature is better than other literature, the truth is that all art is relative to individial tastes. Thus, it doesn't make any sense to think that a novel like this one is really any better than say, Michael Crichton or Stephen King. Aesthetic standards can't be grounded.

  Thus, don't listen to anyone who tries to distinguish between "serious" works of literature like this one and allegedly "lesser" novels. The distinction is entirely illusory, because no novels are "better" than any others, and the concept of a "great novel" is an intellectual hoax. This book isn't as good as Harry Potter in MY opinion, and no one can refute me. Tastes are relative!
  

• I recently took up the hobby of reading "classics" instead of teenage dramas or mysterys. 1984 was second on my list. But now I'm left wondering why is this book a classic? This book was descriptively crude with its love affair and prostitute, redundant with its thoughts and routine, and overall dull. I admit that this book did have a good message and was thoroughly enforced from the beginning to end. However, thats all that happened.
  It was just thoughts of a sad man with perverse and suspicouis thoughts. The main character constantly dwelled on how horrible everything was and eventually how he was going to fight against it. But never did, unless you count having an affair and writing in a journal or buying an old paperweight.
  At times the story would pick up, and just as quickly as it picked up it drastically fell back into the continuous complaints of Winston.
  1984 is well written. I guess, there were quantities of complex words tied in with a new language created within the book (Newsspeak). Keep your dictionary handy.
  The chararcters also lacks personality. They were so 2 deminsional.
  Overall it was impossibly hard to follow, and paragraphs could be skipped and you wouldnt miss a thing.

Not to mention that tragic ending. No steps were made toward anything! It stops about were it left off except Winston loves BB and loves his torturor.

This book was an overrated classic and a big fat FLUB!


• Goerge Orwell's "1984" is nothing more than a sorry man's method of taking out his anger at the world. Oh, sure, it is well written, but people make it into so much more than it really is. It is dark, depressing, and I finished reading it feeling like less of a human than when I started. Why is it that a work of literature that is so empty and void of any meaning is considered to be one of the best? I dont understand.
  1984 is one of the biggest cult classic ever. The only difference is that some people say "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" is very good, and some say it is very bad. I have only heard revered praise for "1984".
  It is innacurate, too. In "1984" the government influenced people's minds, taking away their free will. In reality, that is not possible. When the Soviet Union collapsed, even those born into communism helped construct a democracy. Also, in "1984" the party is completely invinsible. It will remain in power forever. History tells otherwise. ALL empires fall. Humanity has been war-torn since it's beginning, and after 5000 years, the world has managed to not be controlled by "Big Brother".
  Quote from "1984": "Humanity is nothing more than one man shoving another man's face in the mud"
  So, "1984" tells us that humans are completely useless and we have no reason to exist.
  Let's take a look at Orwell. When he was not homeless, he lived in poverty. None of his books sold until after he died, and "1984" was one of his later books. Didn't he have plenty to be hateful about?
  The best books make you want to be a better person. "1984" does nothing but make you want to stop caring about everything.
  "1984" is purely a work of fiction, but even though it is grossly unrealistic, it is treated like it was written by God.
  There are so many better books out there, please don't waste your time on such an unfufilling and stupid book as "1984"
  
• i give this book one star i had to read it for class and i know it's suposed to be a "classic" but god itis awful. first of all its NOTHING like the future is probly going to turn out. second of all every one says the aurthor george orwell is so trippy and wierd but i think he's just trying to cover up for the fact that HE CAN'T WRITE. please george do us all a faver and stop writing books.
  

Animal Farm

• When I was in 7th grade, I chose Animal Farm as a book to read from a reccomended reading list. This was a big mistake. In the beginning of Animal Farm it is happy. Animals overcome their master and they rule the farm. It eventually goes downhill from there. Pigs take over and eventually change the animal "commandments" that they animals had created after taking over humans. Pigs end up looking and acting the same as humans. The pigs abuse horses and other helpless animals. This is one of the most depressing and disturbing books I have ever read. I found absolutely no enjoyment or insight from this novel! Take my advice: If you plan to read this anytime soon, please burn it as soon as possible!
• I personally hated this book. I found it thouroughly boring it's tone was intolerqbly bleak and epressing--and poor Boxer! This book was such a bummer. I highly suggest AGAINST reading this book. I'm sure some people enjoyed, but most of my English class and I disliked it. I'm sure the author was a wonderful person, but this was just not a good book. Read something happier like, oh I don't know, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. It's amd excellent read, and with the Holidays coming up, everyone wants to feel happy.
• This book is, without a doubt, the most over rated "classic" I have ever read. It's not like there are multiple themes and ideas up for discussion here. The book has one point that it beats to death over and over again. Why anybody would ever need Cliffs notes to figure out what the book is about is beyond me. If you read the first 20 pages, you already know how the book is going to end. What, you mean the pigs gave themselves even MORE power? Shocking! I never saw that one coming! Save your energy for a book worth reading.
• the book 'animal farm' was not very good. we read it in english, and the book is so boring i almost fell asleep reading it. george orwell must be old. i do not recommend this book to anyone.. try watching tv instead. but dont watch the movie, its worse than the book.
• I didn't like this book at all! I don't care if it was supposed to symbolize history with the Russian Revolution plot but Orwell could've certainly done better to show this historical conflict in a professional and non-fiction type manner than having barn animals fight and kill each other. I wish everyone in this book died cause I didn't care one bit about any of the characters! Orwell didn't make this novel interesting and it seems like a first grader could read this book and like it because everyone at that age thinks that animals fighting is fun. However, I had to read this book in high school and why would I care about this ridiculous nonsense anymore? How dumb did Orwell think I was! I don't get why this book was even published! I advise you not to read this book you will certainly waste your time unless if you're into the silly plots that would never exist in the 21st century

Dune

• After reading Ender's Game...well, to put it lightly, lets just say I got cabin fever. I admit--I have NOT finished the book yet (a side effect of cabin fever), and I WAS intrigued at first. 200 pages in...and nothing remotely exciting was happening. I argue with myself, wondering if I should finish it or not. Will something utterly fascinating grab my attention just 20 pages on? Or will the rest of the l o n g book be a total drab? Dune certainly has a good plot idea, I'm just not sure that Frank Herbert has the gift of grabbing a reader's attention.
• ...I love to read and have read many many books during my 20 years on this earth and after reading this book I must say it is overrated. Frank Herbert is an extremely horrible writer. He goes on and on and on about itand no one cares about and it takes him forever to get to a point. He tries to get all religious and philosophical a lot but it just comes off as very very boring and it is a chore, at times, to read this book. He puts way too much detail.

  The dumbest part about this book is that he makes up a lot of words that don't even exist so in the back of the book is a glossary of terms to tell you what the in the [heck] he is talking about. Look, if you have to put a glossary in the back of a book so readers will understand you, then you know your book is no good. Too many times I had to stop reading the book and flip to the glossary and see what that word meant. Just because it's a science fiction book set on different planets doesn't mean you have to give the story it's own language and religon.

  The dune books after this are even worse and very very pathetic.

  The only good books in this whole series is this book and the four prequels before it. They are done by his son and kevin anderson. They are MUCH better writers than frank herbert. You read the prequels and you never get bored once. The stories are fast paced, action packed, wheel within wheels plot, and contain just the right mind of detail.

  All in all, this is a good book but not great. It's overrated and the fact that it's the best selling science fiction book of all time is a sad outlook on readers. You want to know why books get a bad name? Because books like this exists. Please, check out the four before it but anything else in the dune series is [bad].

  It's sad that dune fans are so immature. They think that because this book is considered a masterpiece, that everyone should like it! BUZZ! WRONG!
  

• I know this is considered a classic and one of the supreme Sci-Fi novels of all time and that's why I was excited to read it. However, I found it boring and disjointed. Some of the characters are interesting and the story has it's moments but it's not worth the time it takes to read it. The story spends too much time building up to events which are either unsatisfying or over the top. The main character was extremely shallow and what personality he did have was still obscure. I didn't care for him at all. He seemed to be as bored as I was with the things going on around him. The book had good concepts but they were never really put to good use. I really wanted this book to be good. I was on it's side to begin with, but now I can see why Herbert had such a hard time finding someone to publish it.
  
• Like many others, I picked up DUNE based on its broadly accepted status as a SF classic. I don't read much SF, so I try to get to the Big Books (War of the Worlds, Ender's Game, Fahrenheit 451, "The Year's Best" anthologies, etc). This was not a good book. The dialogue is stilted, the characters are caricatures, and everyone's always "hissing", "glaring", or "swallowing with a dry throat". The plot is interesting enough, but not nearly as complex or Byzantine as I had expected: warring factions, religious fervor, double-crossing, nefarious rulers, ulterior motives - standard stuff, really. If anything, the plot seems complicated because we're told so little about what the Guild, the Great Houses, and CHOAM really are. Anyway, as a non-SF connoisseur I realize that I don't get to vote on which books are the classics. But from where I stand, DUNE is a poorly-written, lackluster, repetitive tale. It's not the best SF I've ever read; it's not even the best book I've read this month.
  
• Thank goodness it takes only eight thousand years for a little political instability to worm its way in. Dune is crap. It's a bunch of pseudo-science hoodoo. I tried reading this book as a child and I was enchanted for awhile, the idea is so lovely it practically throbs. But really, for some reason, I just couldn't finish it. Now as an adult I tried again to read it and it's just more than silly. I guess Proust is right, you can't go home again. Or whatever. Maybe there was a time to read it and it passed. Of course, the idea is nice. If there was a book on the idea of Dune I'd probably read it. Even the idea of Frank Herbert. Just a book about some cat with a big prophet beard and a penchant for writing crackpot books of science fiction/philosophy. That would be nice. That would compel. Even if he veered at times dangerously close to fascism, which he does, and so does that Nazi Heinlein. It would be hilariously funny to read about some chubby floodge who wrote silly books of facsistic science fiction but never had the heart to get them published (there's a spin on things), and whose rantings were restricted--safely--to the confines of his kitchen. Funny. Sabbath's Science Fictional Theater. Yeah. But Dune is, sadly, really sadly, poorly written and should have been better. Sorry.
  

Radiohead: OK Computer
OMG how can ppl think this is good!!!?!1, May 1, 2004
Reviewer: A music fan from Canada
the singer is really ugly and this band is just sooooo bad!! go buy an avril lavigne cd, shes like the biggest thing rite now, and sooo talented and pretty!!

I can't be sure if the author this 'critique', if I may call it that, is serious. You 'ppl' can be the judge.

The Complete Works of William Shakespeare:

Every year, untold numbers of people (students, etc.) are forced to read him by trained teachers and they still end up questioning his value. Let's examine the Shakespeare cult:
1) Any author who needs an interpreter, explainer, or support from the educational system to keep readers is simply not a vital author. If Shakespeare was a vital author, people would love him without the brainwashing and spoonfeeding of a vast educational system that insists on teaching these tired plays year after year because everyone has done so year after year.
2) Silly romances and boring dramas driven by improbable plots and vulgar jokes are not great literature. These plays are the work of a man who spent far too much time on scandal and trivial junk to be taken seriously.
3) The Shakespeare nuts want it both ways and they can't have it either way. On the one hand, they insist that Shakespeare be regarded with the reverence one would give to holy scripture. No one must dare question its greatness, truthfulness, or entertainment value. If you do so, you will be attacked as a philistine. On the other hand, when people believe this nonsense and stay away from Shakespeare because they do not want to be bored, the cultists insist that we are taking it too seriously and that Shakespeare is simply great theatre (when it is nothing of the sort) which can be enjoyed with as much gusto as a rock concert or a stand up comedy act (which is a lie).
4) Any book that needs a glossary for the reader in order to be understandable must either be abandoned as dated or translated into modern English. The Shakespeare nuts wouldn't insist that anyone read Beowulf in Old English or argue that its Old English language is so beautiful that we all must learn what is now a foreign language to us but they do this when it comes to Shakespeare. This is beyond irrational. Imagine being forced to read a viking saga in Old Norse with only a glossary to assist you because the professor happens to love the cadences of Old Norse. This is no different from the nuts who do the same with Shakespeare.
5) I judge literature on two, and only two, criterion: Is it intriguing? Is it entertaining? I don't give a fig about some academic telling me I need to read something because it is historically important. I doubt that Shakespeare's audience paid to see his plays because they had historical importance and neither will I. Alas, what was entertaining even twenty years ago seems dated and boring today, nevermind what may have been entertaining hundreds of years ago. Old jokes lose their punch, old romances become foolish and insipid with time, old dramas about historical figures become irrelevant and sleep inducing, old concerns no longer concern us. Shakespeare is dated, unfunny, boring.
And no amount of forcing the issue will change that. Free Shakespeare from the support of the educational system and watch him become forgotten as quickly as last years fashions. And I say, "good riddance" to an author who should have been relegated to the trash heap at least a century ago.

From a review of "Atlas Shrugged"

Gag. This has got to be one of the worst books ever written. Never have I read something that made me hate life and everything to do with it.
The whole plot is completely unrealistic and horribly laughable. If all the "movers and shakers" went on strike, I highly doubt the whole world would self-destruct-no, you'd have people pulling together, taking charge and working together to get things back on track. In real life, Dagny Taggert would be a walking cocktail of STDs and John Galt would be the the Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons.
As one of my friends said, "Reading Ayn Rand is like hitting onself over the head with a brick: it feels better when you stop."
Better yet-try and track down "The Crucifixion of Liberty" by Alexander Kerensky. Why that is out of print and this steaming pile is still being published, I'll never know.

Comic Book Guy...LOL

Led Zeppelin IV

The Red Pony, John Steinbeck:

WARNING: IF BOOK IS COMPLETED CONSULT A PSYCHIATRIST AT ONCE.I HAVE BEEN SCARED FOR LIFE. THIS BOOK IS SO GORY, John Steinbeck GIVES TERRIFYING DESCRIPTIONS OF THE DEATH OF TWO HORSES IN THE STORY.O PLEASE FOR YOUR OWN SAKE SPARE YOUR SELF THE PAIN AND DO NOT READ THIS BOOK.

Marx Brothers 'Duck Soup'

"...I can't figure out why anyone ever thought this was funny."

A chuckle can be had looking up on http://rateyourmusic.com/ the sort of artist who divides opinions or who have fanatical followers such as Britney Spears or Michael Jackson.

The heavy rock stuff tends to have reviews by poeple who consider a review with the single line "Limpbizkit roooooccccckkkk!!!!!!!!" as enough to recommend the CD.

Pride & Prejudice
(aka, 'Hugh Grant'? 'Bronte'?)

~ While cultural pundits try to convince you that some literature is better than other literature, the truth is that all art is relative to individial tastes. Thus, it doesn't make any sense to think that a novel like this one is really any better than say, Michael Crichton or Stephen King. Aesthetic standards can't be grounded.

Thus, don't listen to anyone who tries to distinguish between "serious" works of literature like this one and allegedly "lesser" novels. The distinction is entirely illusory, because no novels are "better" than any others, and the concept of a "great novel" is an intellectual hoax. (considering this review was posted for 1984 also, I think it should probably be removed)

~ It did not offer anything I would expect from a good book: surprise, pleasure (intellectual as well as emotional), humor (the character of Mr. Bennet being an exception), new ideas or meaningful information.

~ Sure, there's some tepid commentary on the submissive role of women and the strict social conventions, but there's no action!

~ Piece of advice for everybody who's forced to read this: buy CliffsNotes.

~ I would recommend you read a modern romance novel. ALL modern romance novels would be better than this, even if written by William Shatner.

~ Unfortunately, having been composed in, what, the 1830s, it has become a period drama style romance novel, where instead of foreplay, they have to bow and curtsy and everything. Althought this may appeal to worthless romantics, it will not perform well to the MTV generation. The movie starred Hugh Grant. Please.........

~ To be blunt, the book is boring. There is too much description and not enough meat. The story seems to be leading somewhere, and when you get there, you wonder why you took the journey in the first place. I plead to the human race not to let writers get off this easy by writing such unfulfilling books. Skip Bronte and read Hemingway or Poe.

~ Surely nobody ever spoke like these utterly implausible characters.

The Chrysalids
(which amazon.com doesn't list for some bizarre reason, so I went to amazon.ca)

~ If you actually think that those other reviewers gave it five stars, they probably forgot to change the amount of stars.

~ but if you are considering buying it consider also why our host tolerates unfavorable reviews at all. It knows that "fan" is short for "fanatic", that authors and musicans attract energetic (or otherwise unengaged) partisan proponents, and thus that most reviews will be favorable and inflated. The most suspect favorable reviews here are those that praise this book's litary qualities, for the long and short of it are that it has none.

~ used bookstores are littered with this sort of stuff [...] It has no literary merit whatsoever, and those persons who can't see this are welcome to enjoy it nevertheless, but they should not be teaching English.

~ No I don't hate it because it was forced apon me, it was a week book. The ending was odd and much to fast. There was a big lead up to nothing. The climax was a black hole of emptyness. When written it may verywell have been good but it was not up to todays standards. There are so many better recent books I have read. No I'm not dumb I have a 92% in english and a 96% average. I feel we should let the book die and pick up a new book published in this decade. Support the new authors not the dead ones.

~ I would not have my own read it and I don't recommend you have yours read it. It teaches them the wrong lessons. It tells us that problems are best ignored, that you don't have to ever grow up if you don't want to. It encourages xenophobia and paranoia (in the popular, non-clinical sense of the word) and--I don't know how to put this delicately--cold-blooded violence.

~ As if anyone could give this book a good review. Did the author write all of the reviews, or something?

~ It was very confusing, and should not be given to grade 9 students. I mean, he falls in love with his cousin, that's really sick.

The Scarlet Letter
(which I didn't enjoy all that much, but these reviews...)

~ Why the couple couldn't have gotten a divorce is beyond me

~ The novel also holds little relevance in today's world, for example religion is not the law of the land.

~ Although this book, is considered a great work of literature, written to describe the harshness of Purtian New England. Plus, this book was heavily laiden with symbolism, and many other literary tools.

~ I'm sure I would be able to understand the vivid descriptions and symbolism in this book much better, if Hawthorne were not writing in some sort of moon man language.

The Crucible


~ I did not like this novel because it's characters are too suspicious and unreasonable. They threaten people with death if they do not admit to crimes they didn't commit. It's crazy!

~ Like most classics, it sucks.

~ And then, on top of a slow plot and dry story line, Miller has the tenacity to set the entire play in only four or five rooms.

************

What really amuses me about all the books I'm looking up are the amount of people who bitch about the author "using too many big words." Or, if the book is a classic that was written, say, a hundred years ago, they say the characters all "talk funny," and suggest that the book be "modernized." Then there's the group of people who brag about a) how smart they are b) their grades in English or c) how they read everything, "but..."

The most amusing are the reviews that combine all three. In short: this is a great game.

My Bloody Valentine - Loveless

- This music is so stupid and weird not in a good unique way but just an uncomfortable way like when you are at someone's house and you don't like them and want to go home but you can't and you probably have to spend the night in their living room....really really crappy don't do this to yourself forget this crap and this stupid type of music

Spirited Away

• "Kept waiting for the good part. Then the credits rolled. The only cool part in this three-hour eye-glazing inscrutable meandering unengaging overwrought plotless wad of celluloid is when the parents turn their heads to that whiny dejected bland one-dimensional bipolar waif what's-her-name after they've been eating at the table."


• "spirited away? stay away! For years we watched Pokemon and that was creative, deep and funny. This movie was similar but had nothing special in it."

American Beauty

• "This movie is a who dun it where you have to guess who killed the dad. Now, i dint see American beauty because I dont like mystery...Even though I dint see it i know from previews for it that it was the dark haied girl who killed him, I think she's his daughter? See, I'm right and look at all the time and money i saved by not watching American Beauty!!!"


• "This movie had nothing to say to me, I got no meaning from it. I found some humor in Lester's actions, but I much prefer the attitude and antics of Peter in Office Space to Lester in american beauty."

My results were like everyone else's - really not that funny.

some of these reviews seem pretty on the money to me...

Amazon.com Knee-Jerk Contrarian Game

• This game is the kind of thing that would only appear to idiot elite snobs who think they have better taste than everyone else. Well, I have news for you d00dz: the joke's on you! Hah, you spend all your trime wasted pourng thru Shakespeare, while we get to warch American Idol. Who's laughing now???

Is 'sucky suckface' trying to use sarcasm or just a fool like I think he is?

(the dude will abide)

All of my friends have raved to me about this movie, and I finally watched it. It was just awful! There is no plotline, no likeable characters, and absolutely no point to this huge mess of a movie. None of the eccentric characters are even close to funny, and I found myself wondering why in the world they agreed to make this picture. Julianne Moore is a great actress, but she has absolutely no function in this film. John Goodman is great at what he does, but in this all he does is run around yelling, bowling, and screaming about Vietnam. Jeff Bridges just wanders around in his bathrobe for 2 hours muttering "man, ya know, man". And then there's poor Steve Buscemi - a wonderful character actor normally, but his character here is only allowed to say half his lines before Goodman's character tells him to shut up.

And the plot...what plot? This movie had no development or climax...it just kind of ended, leaving me wondering what other worthwhile things I've could've done in the 2 hours I used to watch it. But maybe it's just me...my friends sat around and laughed throughout the entire movie, why I will never understand...

Brief Encounter
'My wife and I watched this film with high expectations. This couple did not fall in love -- they fell in love with falling in love. Sadly, many many people don't know the difference, and this couple never figured it out, either. Read chapter 3 of THE FIVE LOVE LANGUAGES by Gary Chapman (taken from M. Scott Peck THE ROAD LESS TRAVELED) which plainly and clearly explains what "falling in love" really is; Chapman's book will do more for your romantic and love life than watching this movie.'

Midnight's Children
'This is the worst book I have ever read. First of all, the magical realism does NOT work for Rushdie, especially in this historical novel. Secondly, the narrative is horrible-it's disjointed and choppy and goes all over the place. Thirdly, Rushdie loses the whole book once Saleem Sinai enters the jungle; unitl that point, the novel is actually decent. The whole jungle part needs to be edited out. Rushdie really loses it when he has Indira Gandhi castrate the Midnight's Children; when the castration happens, the book loses all credibility whatsoever. Unless you absolutely loathe someone, I would not recommend this book to them.'

Jane Eyre
'What a piece of crap
December 16, 2003
Reviewer: fred from New York, NY USA

The only thing less exciting than this book would be watching paint dry.

Stuffy english characters abound in this failed attempt to be Dickens-esque.'

Wuthering Heights

'I think everyone who enjoys this book is a woman. I don't mean to sound sexist, it's just true. I've never met a woman who didn't love this book, And I've never met a man who liked it. I hated it. I won't say it was a bad book, because it's a classic, and the most you're allowed to say about a classic is that you didn't enjoy it, which I didn't. Sorry to say, this is the FIRST classic novel I've ever read that I didn't enjoy. And I've read a lot. '

Things Fall Apart

'I was forced to read this book for my high school lit. class and I am truly convinced that the teacher did it for cruel and unusual punishment. It is almost impossible to concieve how boring this novel was. The main character was very annoying. He was arrogant and never interesting. you never got to get personal with the character's. It was like reading a quick obituary. The plot never got good and there was no humor. only flat meaningless words.I'm not the only one who felt this way. No one in my class liked the book and we complained everyday. my best friend was incapable finishing the book. if you're a kid in school don't even try it.'

but worst of all

The Surrendered Wife : A Practical Guide to Finding Intimacy, Passion, and Peace with Your Man

'This book has been a flashlight in the darkness! When I discovered this book I was ready to divorce my husband and couldn't remember a single reason I married him. This was just a month ago. I was frustrated, exhausted, bitter and ready to give up. From the introduction of Surrendered Wife, I though Laura was psychic! I cried because someone had found me out. She made me admit that my guy was "one of the good ones", but I ha'dn't allowed him to be. He didn't think, act, talk like me. When her chapter said "You probably want to throw this book away now! That's exactly what I wanted to do! Am I sittinging in the lily field today?! ---hardly! I've finally surrended our finances and am learning to say "I can't do that". My husband is freaking out with his new responsibilities, but he's loving making the decisions and I'm loving his generosity even though I'm unnerved by the decisions he'll make! But "That's not my problem, that's no longer my problem! Thanks for an answered prayer.'

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

• I must admit I was misled from the beginning, I thought that this book was actually "The Guide to the Galaxy." However, I was disappointed to find that Adams's book is only referring to a made up book that explains useless knowledge to ficticious characters. Therefore making this book even more useless!
  
• I was told more than hundreds of times that this book was a classic and truly funny. In the end, I was truly disappointed. In no way did i find that this book was good. It attempts to make fun of the creation of Earth, praises the "intelligent" mice and most shockingly, pokes fun at the High and Almighty God.
  
• There is also surprisingly frequent use of common grammatical errors such as missing commas, misplaced modifiers, and sentence fragments. The grammar in the book makes it hard to respect the author much for his writing ability. There also seems to be large words used where they are unnecessary that just seem to be attempts to make the book seem better and the author smarter.