<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/wordpress-mu-1.2.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8216;An affront of the greatest order&#8217;</title>
	<link>http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2009/06/29/an-affront-of-the-greatest-order/</link>
	<description>When film critic Will Pfeifer isn’t watching movies, he’s reading about movies, talking about movies, thinking about movies or dreaming about movies. Now he shares that unhealthy obsession with you. From Hollywood hits to Japanese obscurities, from Oscar night to the summer season, he’s got movies on the brain  — and on this blog.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:05:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=wordpress-mu-1.2.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: egyas</title>
		<link>http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2009/06/29/an-affront-of-the-greatest-order/#comment-1749</link>
		<author>egyas</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:36:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2009/06/29/an-affront-of-the-greatest-order/#comment-1749</guid>
		<description>You know, it was an easy move to like.  Yes, it had flaws.  Yes, it had stupid moments (like the twins, the little salvage-bot, etc).  But let's think about this for a moment...

It's a movie about children's toys that are transforming robots mixed with top-notch visual effects.

I read Mr. Humanick's review, and I wonder if he even watched the movie.  He certainly doesn't describe the same movie I saw, at least not in my opinion.

I liked the movie.  I'll buy it when it comes out and add it to my collection.  Based on the sales numbers, I'd say that the majority of folks out here liked it too.

Yet another "miss" for the "professional" film critics.  I swear, I know it's not really true, but it seems at times like unless it's a foreign film, an art film, something slamming the right-wing or religion, or (to borrow a line from another TV show) "a film about gay cowboys eating pudding", the critics give it thumbs down.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know, it was an easy move to like.  Yes, it had flaws.  Yes, it had stupid moments (like the twins, the little salvage-bot, etc).  But let&#8217;s think about this for a moment&#8230;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a movie about children&#8217;s toys that are transforming robots mixed with top-notch visual effects.</p>
<p>I read Mr. Humanick&#8217;s review, and I wonder if he even watched the movie.  He certainly doesn&#8217;t describe the same movie I saw, at least not in my opinion.</p>
<p>I liked the movie.  I&#8217;ll buy it when it comes out and add it to my collection.  Based on the sales numbers, I&#8217;d say that the majority of folks out here liked it too.</p>
<p>Yet another &#8220;miss&#8221; for the &#8220;professional&#8221; film critics.  I swear, I know it&#8217;s not really true, but it seems at times like unless it&#8217;s a foreign film, an art film, something slamming the right-wing or religion, or (to borrow a line from another TV show) &#8220;a film about gay cowboys eating pudding&#8221;, the critics give it thumbs down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
