February 20, 2006

What is the deal with the NYT and the Colin Farrell movie?

Are they advertising that heavily everywhere? Or do they think we Times readers are especially likely to want to see Farrell's micro-range of acting skills? Oh, wait, maybe it's that they know Baltar reads the Times and they want to make sure he doesn't miss the new film, seeing how he loved that other Colin Farrell movie so much.

Posted by binky at February 20, 2006 09:19 AM | TrackBack | Posted to Media | Movies | Petty Rants


I've seen those too. It really, really looks like it sux. It looks like it's going to be a slightly altered version of "Dances with Wolves", only with Spanish invaders instead of American settlers.

I can't imagine seeing it, though it's possible. But only on video.

Posted by: baltar at February 20, 2006 09:49 AM | PERMALINK

What if we beg you? Your suffering produces such amusing reviews!

Posted by: binky at February 20, 2006 09:51 AM | PERMALINK

aw come on, does, er, whatshisname deserve no more credit than that? thin red line guy. whats his name!? anyway, i share everyone's reservations about it, but the Times reviewed it favorably.

Posted by: moon at February 20, 2006 10:18 AM | PERMALINK

(and even if i ended up liking it, i'm sure baltar's roast would be plenty entertaining.)

Posted by: moon at February 20, 2006 10:19 AM | PERMALINK

Actually a fair number of critics have liked it - and a lot of the blog uber-film geeks (I mean cinephiles) have absolutely loved it.

But yeah, I don't get that level of advertising either - and it's been going on for weeks.

Posted by: Armand at February 20, 2006 12:00 PM | PERMALINK
Post a comment

Remember personal info?