>not as good as the first obviously threequels

So you\’re saying last sausage from the factory isn\’t as good as the first one.
We developed a taste, didn\’t we?

All sarcasm aside, this is not against you Gerard as I don\’t know you.

But there is something that I want to get out of my system.

The new taken is only a movie because it is technically shot on film.

It\’s not a movie it\’s just \’moving images\’ (for a lack of better term).
Granted it could please a certain audience.
Like silly cartoons with flashy colors could please your two years old.

Because those are not movies they are usually critics proof: no matter what the movies critics say about the last Michael Bay opus, people will flock in droves.
Because they\’re in for the \’moving images\’.

There should be two kind of reviews:
– review for movies: full on thoughtful essay about the work.
– review for \’moving images\’: clearly states that the current work was not intended to be a movie, fails to develop any stake or emotional connection to the story/character and is targeted to an audience with a specific set of taste (the two years olds with buying power).
In three lines of text.
Tops.
And use the rest of the review to write an *entertaining* piece on another subject.

At the end of the year, I would like to see the \’moving images\’ having their own top 10 list or award (not the razzie though).

Also it would be nice to be able not to file Michael Bay, Megaton and Mc G. in the same occupation as Scorcese, Kurosawa, PT Anderson etc.

Or spot the exact time Luc Besson stopped directing movies and went fabricating \’moving images\’.