WSJ's Joe Morgenstern

Joe Morgenstern is the movie reviwer for the WSJ. His reviews are published in the Journal's Weekend Edition on fridays. I usually pick up the friday edition of the WSJ for the crossword puzzle (also located in the Weekend Edition), so I often read Mr. Morgenstern's reviews, which are always on the first page.

I confess to not being an expert in the art of the motion picture. In fact, I don't even know some of the technical terms that are bandied about by reviewers. In addition, I generally like most movies, and completely dislike very few of them (a notable exception to this last point was the movie Waiting to Exhale, one of the few movies that I actually wanted to leave the theater before it was finished.) To state it bluntly, I am completely unqualified to be a movie critic myself.

However, I don't feel inappropriate being a critic of the critics. Why are so many of them overwhelmingly negative? Is the movie industry in this day and age really in as bad a shape as the contemporary critics make it out to be? It seems to me that the critics are either looking for perfection or actually like to complain. Maybe writing a bad review makes for better press. In the case of Morgenstern, a bad review usually leads his column even if several other good reviews are included later down the page. His latest diatribe is against Ocean's 12, a movie that I have been looking forward to seeing. The problem is, after reading a bad review, it is hard to go to see the movie without thinking of the review. I keep telling myself that I'm going to avoid reading reviews alltogether, but I find myself perusing through them time after time. I have no one to blame but myself. But, I wish Mr. Morgenstern were a little bit more positive about the movies.

I was reading on a website, Metacritic, about how Mr. Morgenstern rates movies lower than the average on a consistent basis. Interestingly, people seem to find this appealing. In the comments section of the webpage, Mr. Morgenstern is praised

In contrast, I like Roger Ebert, and I usually agree with his opinion.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The agony of victory....a.k.a. picking my jaw up off the floor

Allright. I've now had nearly 24 hours (although its taken me a couple of days to complete this post) to calm down, reflect upon and digest the improbable gut wrenching game yesterday in which the heavily favored Colts lost to the Steelers 21-18. I wrote last year of not being as emotionally attached to the Steelers as I have been in the past. I wrote last week of how I thought that I might be spending too much valuable time following the Steelers, especially since I have absolutely no control over the outcome of their games. Let me just say this: yesterday's game was probably in the top five emotionally draining, and ultimately gratifying, experiences of my life. Ouside of my wedding and the birth of my two sons, I can't remember being as nervous, deflated, joyful, stunned and exhilirated as I was yesterday----all withing about a ten minute stretch of seemingly neverending time! What could have been a devestating loss to live with in the offseason (and, forever, for Jerome...
Read more

"The Axis of Evil and the Doctrine of Preemption Three Years On"

Jerod and I attended a lecture by Brookings Institution fellow Michael O'Hanlon last night at Park University in Parkville, MO. The lecture was part of the Jerzy Hauptmann Distinguished Guest Lecture series. As a Park University M.B.A. alum, I received an invitation to the 13th annual lecture in the series. I like going to events like this, especially since I was interested in the content of this particular lecture, of which the title was the title of this post. Dr. O'Hanlon described himself as a Sam Nunn Democrat at the beginning of the lecture. It's always difficult to prevent political feeling from entering into objective analysis, and I don't know how you measure the "objectiveness" of analysis, but I feel that most Brookings scholars are at least "fair", and Dr. O'Hanlon was no exception. His analysis of the doctrine of preemption was focused on the effectiveness of the doctrine, as opposed to any moral righteousness or implications of the...
Read more

Removing a password that was created in a previous version from an Access 2007 database

Earlier this week I was banging my head against the wall trying to figure out how to remove a password from an Access 2007 database (file extension .accdb). The database was created in a previous version of access and subsequently "upgraded" to the Access 2007 format. I believe some type of a wizard was used to perform the "upgrade." The security model is evidently different in Access 2007 than in previous versions. It doesn't appear that you can set/unset database passwords. Instead, in Access 2007, there is an option to Encrypt with Password. I'm not sure if this is supposed to be logically similar to the earlier version password architecture, but there was no way that I could find to easily remove the password that had been created in the earlier version when using the Access 2007 interface. Access security has always been confusing to me, and I need to take the time someday to understand how the security model is supposed to work in Access 2007. An...
Read more