Oh I dunno, bloodied, eviscerated vagina's are pretty funny - if that's the way your mind works. Obviously Stephanie's does.

"Teeth" may be terrible or it may be amazing or it may be somewhere in between. All I know is that it's impossible to tell from a Stephanie Zacharek review, as she's usually stuck in automatic pilot, tossng out low scores to pretty much everything she sees (presumably this practice makes one feel like the reincarnation of Pauline Kael).

Five films she reviews today and-- ohmigod, who would have thunk it-- she dislikes all five. Were this a rare occurance, it might be significant. As it is, it just makes me wish there was a critic around these parts who actually gave us a clue about the films. Instead, it's like trying to find out which foods you'll like by interviewing a child stuck in the "terrible twos." Do you like Broccoli? NO! Do you like French Fries? NO! Do you like fish? NO NO NO! (child hurls plate across the room, and begins screaming).

I've pointed out before how telling it is if you ever look at those charts they publish in "Entertainment Weekly" where we get to see the scores of ten or so national critics on several films side-by-side. Stephanie's scores often read down her column like an uninterrupted list of "D"s and low "C"s. It's like she's some Bizarro world reflection of those useless critics who hand out "A"s to everything. Some may call this iconoclastic, but its an easy and rote iconoclasm. It's just as tedious, and absolutely just as unhelpful to most readers as Larry King tossing out "A"s to everything from "Alvin and the Chipmunks" to "There Will Be Blood." As a film critic, Stephanie Zacharek has become the Bizarro World Larry King. I'm not sure that's exactly the critical reputation she was aiming for.

I prefer those lopped off bloodied breasts myself for grim laughs..

Seriously though, since when is it OK to THINK, much less say, that lopped off penises are good for grim laughs?

You women want political correctness and the inevitable thought control it engenders? Engage in some of it yourselves.

Of course, in the world as I would like to see it, I would let Stephanie have her comment. I, and all men, would also be able to make similar jokes about lopped off vaginas and breasts too.

Anyway, too much thinking about too little.

that talks?

"Gums its subject."???!!! Umm... I haven't even seen the movie yet, but this review sucks. With a dumb pun like that, Ms. Zacharek has crossed the line that she has tender-touched way too many times. Get over your own cleverness, already!

PS- I can't WAIT to see the movie and make my own judgement.

Hey, at least she didn't say the movie "lacks bite."

.......

whoops

Am I the only one reading the review who thinks that the cut penis comment was sarcasm? Stephanie is letting you know the movie is NOT funny...even when it tries to be.

As to SZ not liking any of the film's she reviewed today, maybe they weren't that good. I don't see many defenders of the actual movies in any of comments to these reviews.

Well, only if her teeth are solid gold and you throw all your worldly possessions into the maw, too.

When looked at through the lens of all the film classics that have come before, a trifle such as this film is not likely to be much more than mediocre.

I know I myself cannot stand to see more than say a dozen films a year that I choose based on a few factors.

They are not Hollywood ending prepackaged or reconstituted schlock (City of Angels?),

They have an interesting or original premise or a new way of representing something deep and intellectual (Golden Compass),

They are a sharp satire, belly laugh comedy, action or sci fi flick (Idiocracy, Bean, Matrix)

They are by a favorite director (Coens, one of the Andersons, Woody, Scorcese).

Beyond that, I avoid theaters unless somebody is literally dragging me to a movie.

95-97% of movies out there severely SUCK. Zacharek is merely reflecting this ratio. Rock on Stephanie.

People have been laughing at a man's expense for centuries now. How many times have we seen some variation of a penis or balls being kicked, punched, lopped off, or otherwise, and then laughing? It's an old theme.

Maybe this movie is just a lot more explicit.

Seriously? Teeth in her vagina? Reminds me of an old joke I heard long ago.

No, you are not.

(They probably know it too, actually --but why pass up the chance to get an early start on today's Misogyny Fest?)

There actually IS a patent pending (I saw it in a magazine some time ago) for a "tooth"-bearing contraption (made of metal) that a woman can wear for "self-protection." Don't know if it ever actually got marketed.

Am I the only one who's thinking this is some kind of comment/exaggeration/satire/taking-to-the-extreme project inspired by the classic 70's skin flick "Deep Throat"?

If it's not acceptable for women it's not acceptable for men. I understand that equality is one of the more frustrating features of feminism, since it undermines the obvious pleasure that some derive from double standards. How could anyone use such a phrase without knowing that?

Men being mutilated - good.

Women being mutilated - bad.

signed,

Increasingly Worried Male

Last point on sarcasm and double entendres....

Do you remember the movie "Scream"? It made a joke about the beautiful woman who while running (with the obligatory trip) who slowly loses most of her clothes, gets wet, and then gets the knife in her silicone breast. It's pretty funny because it' a decent parody of a ton of slasher flicks I saw growing up. BTW, those cheesy movies and the movie "Scream" were never critic's favorites either.

As for penis jokes, well, I doubt that all the producers or viewers of America's Favorite Home Video's were women. I wasn't a fan because I could only stand so many "hit in the crotch" scenes.