tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5739988173608622636.post6812074180420758211..comments2008-06-19T11:25:19.036-04:00The Critichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01768021256241884587thecritic@reeljudges.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5739988173608622636.post-77199834085578594482008-06-19T11:25:19.036-04:002008-06-19T11:25:19.036-04:00Where is the review of The Zohan?The Red Roosternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5739988173608622636.post-12775599892036371852008-05-13T14:29:57.287-04:002008-05-13T14:29:57.287-04:00I agree with anonymous in that it is slightly confusing, but, and I know this is hard to do, i want to try to distance guilty from having a negative connotation (simply for the sake of the site alone). For me, it makes more sense saying guilty (almost like a guilty pleasure). Obviously in real life, not guilty is great, but in the context of a review, when i think about it, not guilty seems like Im trying to say you should "not" see the movie. I know this was a convuluted answer that might not have made sense, but lets go with it and Ill see what other kind of feedback i get.The Critichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01768021256241884587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5739988173608622636.post-78805887948987796782008-05-13T13:39:17.636-04:002008-05-13T13:39:17.636-04:00Could you please explain your handle of "panopticon?"Frank the Tanknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5739988173608622636.post-84920111655998950572008-05-13T12:17:16.803-04:002008-05-13T12:17:16.803-04:00just my two cents, but shouldn't the "guilty", "not guilty" thing be switched around. The way i see it, if the movie presented to the Judges really sucks, then it should be Guilty of the crime of being really crappy..... and if it's pretty good, then it should be acquitted of all crimes thus giving us the green light to go see.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com