Take 4 Backchat: (Dis)Order in the Court

Time to open a new feature in Take 4: Backchat. Yes...had several comments regarding my Order in the Court reviews, so thought I'd share them with the rest of the class. If you send me your thoughts on the Evil Little Brats (or other) reviews, you may be featured in upcoming editions!

******************************************

From Honey Parker:

OK,

I look forward to your take on films, particularly when you discover a gem I've known about for years. But I must say I was a bit disappointed when your review of 12 Angry Men only merited a, worth considering. This is a morality play, played out by some of the most solid actors of the time. A chance to see them tackle something without melodrama. A chance to see a character arch happen 12 times in one room. A fresh view of a classic setting and writting that holds up decades later.

Oh, Curt. Where have I gone wrong?

Dear Honey:

Remember...a "Worth Considering" is still a good rating. It just not something I feel you should go to the store with a mind to rent. If your "must sees" are all gone, keep 12 Angry Men in your back pocket and rent it then. It was a good film...and, yes, solid...but not a "Oh...wow...you HAVE TO see this." See it, enjoy it...but don't rush out to rent it. It's not something to plan a weekend around.

******************************************

From Kim Becker:

Totally agree with your take on Legally Blonde 2. I loved the first one, but rolled my eyes through most of the second one. And I’m putting runaway jury at the top of my list. Bummed I missed it originally.

Dear Kim:

Thanks for the validation. Good to know when I'm on spot on. Let me know what you think of Runaway Jury when you see it!

******************************************

From My Mom:

The juror who held out was Henry, not Peter Fonda.

Dear Mom:

Thanks for the correction. At least I didn't say Jane Fonda.