MacGruber has a 79% on Rotten Tomatoes.

I may have not written this entry had I not found this picture.

I think we have a national treasure on our hands; a term I use as defined below:

National Treasure (na·tion·al treas·ure)
- a film which, although being catastrophically flawed in concept, garners exaggerated praise from its audience for somehow not being the huge turd they expected. Based on the movie of the same name.

MacGruber is a spin-off of an SNL skit, which haven't fared well since Wayne's World, and unlike previous SNL fims, the original MacGruber skit wasn't even funny. Okay, maybe it was funny, like, once. MacGruber is essentially a retarded Macgyver. He doesn't use guns, and relies on a variety of scraps to produce explosives; or more realistically here, distractions. His only effective homemade explosive goes off prematurely, and he's apparently more reliable with a stick of celery.

Iron Man 2, or Mickey Rourke's Cockatoo.

Dear readers,

I'm not going to write a letter to Jon Favreau. Deal with it. This is largely due to the fact that I don't have much to say about Iron Man 2, and certainly little to complain about; but also because I'm not going to praise it either. It's Iron Man 2. What did you expect it to be? It's more or less a continuation of the original, an effective sequel, but nothing revolutionary. I'm sure you'd all love the thing if Mickey Rourke had died during filming; but he didn't, and there won't be any pity Oscars given away this year.

Let's be honest. There's always a pity Oscar. That's right, Sandra Bullock. Suck it.

A Necessary Interjection: Whose Idea Was it to Let Me Buy a PS3?

I doubt anyone has noticed, but I haven't updated in a long time. This is most likely due to the fact that I've logged eight days in game time in Call of Duty in the past month. But it is also due to a lack of films coming out that are more interesting than drinking. I do regret missing the Tooth Fairy. That would have been a good entry for all of us.

I really can't blame the quality of cinema, as we all know I prefer to write letters about bad movies. I think I just got winded after making that Top 50 of the decade list. Luckily, I'm not disappointing too many people since I only have nine followers (one of whom I believe is a spambot).

Anyway, here's a little recap to prove I really haven't seen much:

Daybreakers: Too Infuriating to Write About.

Dear Michael and Peter Spierig,

I understand that you probably aren't wearing Edward Cullen underpants right now. You probably don't have the Twilight shower curtain either. But you didn't have to prove it either. Now, you may not have made this film as an attack against Twilight, but your fans certainly see it as such. "Yeah man, vampires are cool again. They ain't whiny fags no more." Lines like this can be seen most places Daybreakers is mentioned on the internet. The comparison does not interest me.

Anyone with half a brain can see that the Twilight films are complete trash, but Daybreakers isn't much better; and it offends me that large amounts of people will praise your film simply because it "isn't Twilight." I'm actually upset that I'm even mentioning Twilight because even though it's a pop culture phenomenon, I don't care about it anymore. It sucked. Move on, people. But everyone is drawing comparisons between the two films, and I really wanted to link to that picture of the underpants. Enough about how Twilight sucks. Let's talk about why Daybreakers sucks. I hate that that's going to be taken as a pun.

Precious, or the Illiterate Dnt Knw Vwls.

Dear Sapphire,

Now technically, you aren't the filmmaker, but since you wrote the novel Precious is based on I feel that you're responsible for its content, which is why I'm writing to you and not the director.

Precious is a character piece in which we are introduced to the titular character at a critical point in her life. She is pregnant with her second child, kicked out of public school, and her mother is still the same evil bitch she always has been. In an attempt to better herself, Precious goes to an alternative school that strives to teach her how to read and write, despite her mother's insistence that learnin' won't get you nowhere. What we get is lots of mother daughter conflict, and a supposed uplifting tale of obstacles overcome. Unfortunately, as Precious' teacher puts it, "your protagonist's circumstances are unrelenting," and just as she's finally making a new life for herself, she finds out that she is HIV+.

So the "uplifting" bit is out the window. Which isn't necessarily bad, but what is the point to all this? You've created these characters and situations, which are intriguing to watch, but is your story really saying anything?

Top Fifty Films of the Decade.

Making a list of your favorite 50 films of the decade is incredibly annoying. It takes too long, and you inevitably reach a point where a third of the list is entirely interchangeable with other films. But I did it. Mostly because I was almost done by the time I realized I should have stopped at the top 25. Keep in mind that I was thirteen when the decade started, hadn't yet kissed a girl and spent more than half of the decade focused on that goal. It took that long to realize that movies are more interesting than women, and at that point I was too far behind to see every good film this decade. As a result, a lot of good films are not on this list because I didn't see them or didn't have the time to watch them again, but also because a lot of movies that you think are good most certainly aren't. So here is my list of my favorite films of the decade, which is a balance of quality and personal bias, because the best of the decade would have been about 50% different, but not nearly as fun. There's probably about fifteen films on this list that I could have swapped out with other things I omitted, but I consider the top thirty or so to be quite accurate. I also must apologize in advance for not being as humorous as usual, I'm much more on my game when I despise something.

Sherlock Holmes and the Mystery of the Recycled Piece of Cinema.

Tony Stark goes back in time to flirt with Jude Law and kill zombies.

Dear Guy Ritchie,

I thought your endless string of crap was over. I thought you had redeemed yourself for the train wreck that was Revolver. That maybe you had finally made a movie that wasn't a complete piece of trash.

You failed. Not that Sherlock Holmes deserves to be thrown out entirely, but you made the most promising trailer of the year out of a film that is essentially a well-polished piece of trash that we've all seen a thousand times. Don't get me wrong; I expected some recycling. But the dialogue is cliched and tired, the plot is tedious, and I half expected Robert Downey Jr. to put on a metallic suit and fly to Iraq. We might as well just accept that Tony Stark was Sherlock Holmes in a previous life. Robert Downey Jr.'s "unique spin" on Sherlock Holmes is certainly unique to the character, but it's not a unique character; we all saw Iron Man last year and it was a hell of a lot better than Sherlock Holmes.