From Something Awful:
Paramount Pictures has had a lot of success in the past. They are a large company and they have a lot of money. For this reason, fans of the distributor know that their newest movie is sure to be good. World War Z is that newest movie. The camera never falls over during a scene. Actors are always in frame. The film runs at a steady 24 frames per second with very few frame drops. Since World War Z has a big enough budget to ensure that it doesn’t have any glaring mistakes, we’re happy to say that it will at least score a 7/10.
…
Many of the actors are attractive. Some of the women have flaws, which really takes you out of their respective scenes.
…
World War Z has a great story. A lot of people talk in it and things keep happening, which makes it cinematic. There are also a lot of impressive explosions, which make the movie even more cinematic. This is some next-gen stuff. You can clearly see everyone’s facial expressions and everyone’s face has a lot of detail so that makes the movie good.
There is a lot of shooting, and a lot of people get killed. It’s very satisfying. Some people have been complaining about the level of violence as of late (I call them entitled whiners) but what else is going to be in a movie?
This actually sounds like what some complainers here think my reviews should sound like.
Via Movie City News.
It has always been my contention that a bad game is worse than a bad film or novel because in the latter two cases, at their worst, they are still functional cultural products, whereas a bad game does not work at all.
That’s a joke, right?
“The studio is taking out lots of advertising with us this month, so we think this film is the best thing EVER!”
Oh, wait…
“This actually sounds like what some complainers here think my reviews should sound like.”
More depressingly, I can imagine you doing this as a parody, like some reviews you’ve done in the past, and it being taken seriously.