Not Big Enough
I think The Big Lebowski is a classic. It came out after Coen Brothers' Fargo--a film I'm not so enamored of--so a lot of critics gave it the back of their hand at the time.
However, since then, its stock has only gone up. A cult has grown around it. Most people get it's pretty special.
It was recently playing on TV and I checked it out. I was surprised to see when I pressed the info button that it got only two stars. I expected four stars, and would have understood three, but someone in charge of official ratings is giving it two? How did that happen? White Chicks gets two stars.
posted by LAGuy @ 12:59 AM
7 Comments:
Who gives these stars? CW-dispensers?
God knows why, but there's a post & comments on metsblog.com about which is the better bowling movie, Big Lebowski or Kingpin. I've seen neither so can't opine.
Actually, it's LAGuy. Thanks, Google.
I'd like to know who does the ratings, too. I believe there are different services for different cable companies, since I've seen different numbers of stars for the same movie. It's actually a pretty big undertaking to rate and describe thousands of films. I'm pretty sure it's not Leonard Maltin, by the way.
Big Lebowski is the Coen Brothers, Kingpin is the Farrelly Brothers. Almost no point in comparing. But I do like both films more than Groundhog Day (see January 10th).
QG, you've never seen Big Leb? Oh, how I envy you. It's almost as good as never having seen the original La Femme Nikita. Or Raising Arizona.
Not to raise your expectations.
SWMBCg, etc.
Or Highlander.
SWMBCg, etc.
At the risk of changing the subject, I think Miller's Crossing is a better movie than either Barton Fink or The Big Lebowski.
Oops. My bad. I meant Fargo and The Big Lebowski. Barton Fink belongs pretty far down the list.
Post a Comment
<< Home