free counter with statistics Princess Protection Program Review | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

demilovato.jpg
Pajiba Jumps the Shark! Again.


Princess Protection Program / Guest Critic: Ling

Film Reviews | June 23, 2009 | Comments (44)


In one of Dustin’s emails to me during our correspondence about this review, he gave me a piece of advice that I originally brushed off as obvious. “Looking forward to it, Ling,” he wrote. “Any piece of writing by a commenter so eloquent, bitingly witty, and devastatingly sexy as you should be a joy to read and edit. Just keep in mind the audience while composing the review.” Feeling rather chuffed, I replied, “Ha. Don’t worry about it. I’m as cynical as the next pain-in-the-ass hipster.” I didn’t think there was any chance I would actually like a Disney Channel movie and be thus compelled to write an un-pajiba-ly favorable review.

Well, strip me down and spank me senseless, because the impossible has happened. I did like the movie, and this is a favourable review.

Nobody is more shocked than me. I’ve done some soul-searching, and I think I’ve figured out why: before the lights had even dimmed, I weighed the cost of not liking it. You have to understand that this was a world premiere, meaning the two stars (Demi Lovato and Selena Gomez of Disney Channel fame) were sitting like right there, as well as the bigwig Disney executives. There was a chance, a good chance, of being asked my opinion of the movie by people who had a vested interest in its success. While I would love to be the person cool enough to be honest with a Disney exec, I myself had a vested interest, and that was to keep them happy. If they were happy, the Family Channel execs that were running the event would be happy. And if they were happy, they’d give me more work. It’s oddly self-serving, but that’s how I roll.

The “Disney Channel Original Movies” slate is an entity that is as intriguing as it is annoying, especially when compared to Disney’s theatrical releases. In the case of the latter, the Disney brand’s image of quality is interpreted in such a way as to strive to create solid plots, developed characters, and watertight scripts. Current movies (the Pixar slate), my personal favorites (any 1990’s-era musical starring a fierce brunette heroine), and my parents’ childhood staples (starring iconic blonde ditzes) fit this criterion. In terms of external packaging, the animation is beautiful, but far from realistic, and characters are drawn with flaws. I’m thinking here of both Disney’s oldest offering, in which Snow White is given endearing baby-like chubby cheeks, and their newest, Up, which, as all of you know, features a borderline obese protagonist.


And then we have the Disney Channel movies, churned out for your watching pleasure since 1997. External perfection is the norm. Clothes are trendy and perfectly pressed. Hair is glossy. Eyes pop from behind perfectly-applied eyeliner. Beautiful people; every frame could be a clothing ad. And the script, plot, character development - all a vehicle for the on-screen perfection. It’s movies like these that made Zac Efron a star. The latest addition, Princess Protection Program, is as much a glorified Abercrombie catalogue as its predecessors.

The plot is simple as toast: Rosalinda Maria Montoya Fiore (Lovato) is the crown Princessa of Costa Luna, a small island kingdom whose official language seems to be English with a variably strong Spanish accent. In the wake of her father’s untimely passing, she is preparing to become a 17-year-old monarch. Strangely for Disney, no mention beyond a conveniently placed line is made of the father or any grief at his death; in fact, the young beauty and her mother seem rather content with her impending coronation, leaving the sadder but wiser audience members to assume that the father was assassinated by his own family. (This suspicion is never addressed, which could be either laziness or genius.)

Ten days before the coronation, rebels storm the palace, calling for the unseating of the monarchy and installation of a militant dictator named General Magnus Kane (Billy Ray Cyrus - kidding! Johnny Ray Rodriguez). A shockingly snappy action sequence ensues that involves a sword thrown Pirates of the Caribbean-style into a wall, skewering Rosalinda’s tiara in the process. The day is saved by a staggeringly DILF-y military type, Mason, who spirits the princess away on a helicopter, saving her from certain political imprisonment. At this point, the low expectations of the adult audience members have been positively turkey-slapped by what has transpired. Unfortunately, PPP soon finds its mundane feet as we return to the USA.

We next meet the unfortunately-named Carter Mason (Gomez), a high-school student and bait shop employee living in rural Louisiana. Carter, whose only accent is Gomez’s own adorable Texas twang, deals with “bait girl” stigma, which separates her from the rich popular types Disney Channel loves to whip out. (For a popular example, see Evans, Sharpay.) Against a backdrop of green bayou, Carter greets her father, who turns out to be — drumroll — DILF McGee from Costa Luna! But wait — there is a princess sitting in her bedroom, saying shockingly snobby things like “You’re Excused” and “Please!” It will be necessary for Carter to help “Rosie” blend into her high school; otherwise, she will be discovered and seized by the revolutionaries. Actually - holy crap, those are some high stakes. Come on, Disney Channel, what happened to “the respect of one’s peers” as life’s highest priority?

Keep in mind that, this whole time, Rosie’s mother has been a prisoner of the skeevy Stalin-esque villain. Again, the audience is forced to make another uncomfortable assumption: that she is being raped regularly. In this case, we appear to be right: General Magnus Kane forces Mom into a marriage, which leads to the movie’s climax.

Shockingly, the movie works only because of the performance of the two leading ladies. Gomez’s and Lovato’s performances, but for a few hiccups, are strong and subtle and, at times, touching. Lines that would inspire rage out of the mouth of, say, Miley Cyrus, sound appropriately playful here. “I don’t mean I hate you like I hate you, I mean I hate you like you’re my best friend.” There are genuine moments amidst all the hokey manufactured drama, where sometimes silence is used as a dramatic tool (in a better movie, of course, this would go without saying, but here it was delightfully surprising). Also, there is a small but appreciated scene in which Rosie cooks dinner and has Carter and General DILF wear traditional wreaths, and because of this moment, I am now aware that any man with prominently-displayed pecs wearing a laurel wreath (and not just James Purefoy) makes me think sinful thoughts.

(FYI, if you googled “Princess Protection Program” and “Shia LaBeouf,” you might have come across some reports that he’d have a cameo. These were lies.)

But let’s address reality. This movie is objectively not good. The dialogue is shallow. The plot is kinda whack. Those scenes where Lovato speaks Spanish make me gag a little; her accent is empirically terrible, and I wondered why her friend Selena Gomez couldn’t help her out. (Then I giggled to myself and stopped being so racist.) If I hadn’t sort of told myself to like the movie, or if I had watched it in my living room instead of in a 3,000-seat theatre, I would have been quite apathetic towards it. You’re never going to voluntarily see this. Unless you have young kids, you’re not going to rush to set your TiVo for the television premiere (June 28th on Disney Channel/Family Channel, if you’re interested!). If nothing else, take from this review that there are two tweeny performers out there who, despite their Jonas Brothers’ affiliations, are bona fide actresses. They can string a scene together without resorting to shouting, cutesy shrugging, or “schmacting” of any kind. And even if they are hos, which is certainly possible, they manage to keep their skanktacular lives out of ours, for which I thank them.


Ling is a university student, who divides her time between Toronto and Montreal. Check out more of her musings on her blog, Away With The Gypsies.


Battlestar Galactica The Plan Trailer | Ed McMahon 1923 - 2009



Comments

So, basically Ling, you went in expecting it be bad, found it to actually be decent, had second thoughts, had second thoughts about your second thoughts, and came to the conclusion that it was actually just meh?

At least, was there popcorn involved? Hopefully you got something for your time and money other than a guest spotlight on Pajiba and the fusillades of ridicule and scorn that inevitably result?

Cheers!

Posted by: Neodiogenes at June 23, 2009 10:26 AM

Good job, Ling. I kinda have no idea who these people are and I'm pretty sure I don't even get the Disney channel, but I'm glad Agent Bedhead gets to take a break from the tweener movies for a bit.

Posted by: jM at June 23, 2009 10:32 AM

"in fact, the young beauty and her mother seem rather content with her impending coronation, leaving the sadder but wiser audience members to assume that the father was assassinated by his own family."

Niiiiice.

Won't see the movie, but loved the review. Highly entertaining.

Posted by: marya at June 23, 2009 10:45 AM

Oh fuck it...I actually kinda like Demi Lovato. The girl's got some spunk! I'm sure at some point the minis will be watching this and I'll be forced to sit through it, so thanks for the heads up, Ling!

Oh, and FINALLY! Another Montreal-based Eloquent! (At least partially, anyways.) Glee!

Posted by: Jeremy Feist at June 23, 2009 10:46 AM

Only good that can come out of this is, they'll be taking pictures of themselves naked and posting them on the Web in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 23, 2009 10:49 AM

Speaking of Disney TV movies, who's going to take the bullet and review Wizards on Deck with Hannah Montana? My niece is practically apoplectic over its impending arrival. I think if they found a way to work in the Jonas Brothers she would just kind of bleed out.

Posted by: Snath at June 23, 2009 10:53 AM

It's always an odd mixture of shame and dismay when you find yourself enjoying a made for tv movie.

Posted by: kelsy at June 23, 2009 10:53 AM

@ Neodiogenes: I suppose I forgot to mention that. Yes, there was popcorn. Let me be more specific: caramel corn, heart-shaped sugar cookies, and Nibs. And a water bottle and a free Family Channel T-shirt. Couldn't dream of complaining after that bounty.

Posted by: Ling at June 23, 2009 10:54 AM

Hey, look! There's bikini pictures already! That was fast. You've come THIS far, girlies, now show us how grown up you are ...

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 23, 2009 10:59 AM

I was goaded into Tivoing this by my soon-to-be 10 year old. At least I won't cringe when it's on.

IMO, the only good thing about the made for TV movies is that you don't have to go to the theater and pay big bucks to see it when it comes out.

Posted by: mswas at June 23, 2009 11:04 AM

You've come THIS far, girlies, now show us how grown up you are ...

Easy, tcfkab. Nobody wants to see you end up on the National Punctuation Offender Registry Database.

Posted by: branded at June 23, 2009 11:12 AM

Somehow, I feel that Walt Disney would be turning over in his grave at the stuff Disney (the studio) is putting out these days.

This seems like a reverse Princess Diaries, only I can't tell the two girls apart. One has a part on the left side of her head, and one has a part on the right side. I hope they don't have any mirror shots, or I'll mix them up again.

Posted by: BWeaves at June 23, 2009 11:24 AM

Again, the audience is forced to make another uncomfortable assumption: that she is being raped regularly.

Awesome line.

Posted by: courtney at June 23, 2009 11:39 AM

And if they were happy, they’d give me more work. It’s oddly self-serving, but that’s how I roll.

What a whore.

Wow, this is perfectly titled. Between this and Dustin goin' skiing* on The Proposal and the writer of The Proposal, Pajiba is really goin' downhill. That whole thing borders on advertising, and while I don't honestly believe it, it's not too far fetched judging from the adds this website puts up.

Oh, and:
And even if they are hos, which is certainly possible, they manage to keep their skanktacular lives out of ours, for which I thank them.

I'm sorry, was this a movie review?

* - sorry, I think you have to grow up where trucks are prevalent to get that one

Posted by: pissant at June 23, 2009 11:46 AM

As the tortured parent of 2 young girls, I've been forced to watch every Disney Channel Movie ever made. Selena Gomez is cute as a button and is very natural on camera but I just don't get Demi Lovato. She cannot act and scream-sings everything and I want her to go away.

Posted by: Patti at June 23, 2009 11:55 AM

Posted by: pissant at June 23, 2009 11:46 AM

But this and The Proposal were arguably movies that were never going to be seen by most Pajibans anyway. So why do you care? At least she was honest about having certain biases (just like Dustin did).

As far as you other question, I do think it is a valid statement, seeing as how Disney stars are considered pretty much nymphomaniacs around these parts (and that somehow affects their ability to do their jobs, I don't know).

Good job, Ling. And at least now George has some company in the "HOW DARE YOU WRITE THAT" corner.

Posted by: Vermillion at June 23, 2009 12:36 PM

Vermillion, I'd be thrilled to pieces if I could generate even one quarter the interest that George's articles generate.

Posted by: Ling at June 23, 2009 12:53 PM

Well, I thought it was well-written.

Also, Ling, I don't think you're a whore.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at June 23, 2009 1:00 PM

Easy, tcfkab. Nobody wants to see you end up on the National Punctuation Offender Registry Database.

Posted by: branded at June 23, 2009 11:12 AM
---
BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAhahahahaha ... heh ... hey, wait ... IS there such a thing?
***
I can't tell the two girls apart.

Posted by: BWeaves at June 23, 2009 11:24 AM
---
From my copious research, I can attest that one has a Muppet mouth and the chica doesn't.
***
"Demi"? "Selena"?

Why do I see the evil hand of stageparents involved here from birth? Something tells me these girls haven't had a lot of say in their life decisions up to this point.

Throw off the bras and panties of capitalist parental oppression, girls! Viva la revolucion!

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 23, 2009 1:59 PM

Just looked it up, buc, and Demi's full name is Demetria. Her mom was a Dallas Cowboys cheerleader. She has two siblings, Dallas and Madison.

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.

Selena is a common enough name, though.

Posted by: Snath at June 23, 2009 2:05 PM

And I just threw up in someone else's mouth a little.

(Thanks, "Spinal Tap"!)

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 23, 2009 2:43 PM

I say all these things because I love this site and I don't want to see it slip into mediocrity. Honestly, that's why I do this. It is selfish. I just want really good movie reviews, and this site usually delivers. Also, they turn me onto movies that I would never hear about.

Vermillion,
Well, the above comment is why I care. Just because anyone feels that most of the people that read this site aren't going to see a movie(and I feel the amount of comments on the The Proposal thread negate that) doesn't mean it's anything goes, I feel. I have no problem with Dustin's interview. I have no problem with Dustin's review(I gotta man-crush on R-squared, too). But I do have a problem with them together. It's a conflict of interest. Dustin claims he wrote the review before he did the interview, and I believe him, but there will still be doubters, or people who didn't happen to read his comment about it. It would've been better to just have someone else review it. Problem solved. But, some people(and, yeah, probably not many) might stop coming to the site, which would reduce ad revenue, which is probably necessary due to the increasing popularity of the site. If enough people leave, the site can't operate anymore*. No more hilarious, honest reviews for me.

Speaking of the ads, I installed an ad blocker specifically because of this site. I don't mind ads, they help me essentially get content for free. I don't mind if they are gross or whatever, though I don't find them aesthetically pleasing. However, I have a 20MB bandwidth cap at work, and there was a fucking three minute(!) video that loaded at the top which I didn't see until I was done reading a review. That maxed out my bandwidth and I had to fucking do work for the rest of the day. I will not have that! So, in goes the blocker, out goes a small amount of ad revenue. I hope the trade off was worth it(honestly, I do). And I feel bad for not supporting the site.

Anyway, they are Dustin's decisions as I understand he pretty much runs the show around here. And if those god awful gossip posts which temporarily put Pajiba one step away from TMZ get more page hits(revenue) for Pajiba, then good for Dustin, really, but it makes the quality of this site drop. You ever had watered down soda? Meh.

I bitch because I care. Sorry if I'm not constructive enough, which is usually the case.

Oh, and I called Ling a whore for a few reasons. First, the anonymity of the internet emboldens me(and some sites embiggen me). Second, this is Pajiba. And finally, because she would've smiled and played nice to get more work. Sorry, that makes you a whore. It's no different than sleeping your way to the top or shilling Doritos**.

Oh:
and that somehow affects their ability to do their jobs, I don't know

It doesn't. And that's why it shouldn't be in the review, or...fuck, it just shouldn't be the last thing in the review.

* - or maybe it could. You could also argue that if fewer people came than a less beefy server would be needed, which means less money, etc., it naturally takes care of itself.

** - I work 40 hours/week at a job that, despite enjoying it sometimes, I wouldn't show up to everyday if they didn't pay me. So, I'm a whore, too. I'm workin' on it, I swear.

Posted by: pissant at June 23, 2009 2:52 PM

What is it with Disney's fixation on killing off one or both of a protagonist's parents?

Was there any alcohol consumed in the viewing of this movie? I'd love to see a Boozehound's Disney Movie Survival Guide in the future..

I can appreciate your self-preservation, but please, the next time you've got a Mouse executive within striking distance, an eye-gouge, or at least a kick to the junk, is probably the minimum of karmic justice they've got coming. In the names of parents and babysitters everywhere, make them feel our pain!

Posted by: lordhelmet at June 23, 2009 3:08 PM

But, some people(and, yeah, probably not many) might stop coming to the site, which would reduce ad revenue, which is probably necessary due to the increasing popularity of the site. If enough people leave, the site can't operate anymore*. No more hilarious, honest reviews for me.

Oh dear. I highly doubt that will happen. The reviews that get the most attention are always for films everybody wants to hate. More often than not, people clamor for snarky reviews of bad movies than honest reviews of good movies.

As far as the good films, that is what the Retrospectives and Guides are for: highlighting the decent films that might not have gotten the attention they deserved.

And sometimes, there is just nothing else available. There are lulls in movie releases. Slow news days. What have you. And they can't leave the site barren of material, can they? So if they have to give up a few megabytes to some fluff piece to keep the site running, isn't it worth it?

And finally, because she would've smiled and played nice to get more work. Sorry, that makes you a whore.

Um, doesn't pretty much everyone do that, not just whores? Or is it that we are all whores? I am confused, you seem to say that like it is a bad thing.

Posted by: Vermillion at June 23, 2009 3:09 PM

(FYI, if you googled “Princess Protection Program” and “Shia LaBeouf,” you might have come across some reports that he’d have a cameo. These were lies.)

I'll add a corollary: FYI, if you googled "Princess Protection Program" and "Shia LaBeouf," you're probably frequenting the wrong Web site.

Posted by: whatBENwatches at June 23, 2009 3:10 PM

I highly doubt that will happen.
Well, me too. Can't we just strive for something better?

The reviews that get the most attention are always for films everybody wants to hate.

I didn't check, but, didn't The Dark Knight receive a lot of positive attention? I mean, I like it when they tear apart shitty movies, too, but the reason I come here is for the honesty and the quality...and the expletives. That sometimes manifests itself through a thoughtful review of a movie I didn't know existed. Sometimes, it's through a review for 88 Minutes called 88 Words which is hilarious.

And they can't leave the site barren of material, can they?

Yes, they could. I would choose to do that rather than fill it with shit, or make sure it isn't shit that they put up. I'd like to have something as close to perfect as possible(if I had a site). Fuck the fluff. That's the problem with oh so many things these days(says the guy with three placeholder sites and not one single "successful" site).

Or is it that we are all whores?

Not everyone. Some people have ideals and cling to them very tightly. But most, including myself, are whores to some degree or another(in fact, I believe I said that more or less).

And finally, because I'm a prick:
So if they have to give up a few megabytes to some fluff piece to keep the site running, isn't it worth it?

That's a nonsense measurement(what are you measuring?), however, if you mean the amount of space on the server, with php(I'd imagine), that's probably just a few kilobytes. Megabytes? Hmmph, hardly...

Posted by: pissant at June 23, 2009 3:59 PM

If I recall from Ye Olde Introduction Thread, a great many people found this site from gossip sites. Even if you don't like the gossip and feel that it's bringing the site down, a fair amount of people (even the "Eloquents") originally came here from gossip sites, so I would think that posts with links back to those sites are only playing to the interests of a fair amount of Pajibans.

Posted by: Phaeolus at June 23, 2009 6:57 PM

Then I giggled to myself and stopped being so racist

That made me giggle myself. Nice work, Ling! I hope we'll see more from you in the future... or maybe I'll just take to stalking you on your blog. Or both!

Posted by: Melissa Ulmer at June 23, 2009 7:05 PM

Excellent review - though I'll never see the subject. Write more, Ling!

Posted by: Ivy at June 23, 2009 8:20 PM

I do tend to agree with pissant. I liked the site better before the whole "pajiba love" element came online. If I wanted that, I would go to gossip websites, not a website for movie reviews.

Posted by: mae at June 23, 2009 9:11 PM

I didn't check, but, didn't The Dark Knight receive a lot of positive attention?

But that was a major blockbuster movie. Of course it would get a lot of attention, positive or negative. My thing is, if you really look at all the reviews, the ones that get the most comments overall are the negative ones, or at least the ones that are controversial (like certain Apatow and Kevin Smith films).

I'd like to have something as close to perfect as possible(if I had a site). Fuck the fluff.

Well, for one, "perfect" is kinda subjective. That may be perfect for you, but not necessarily for everyone else. Unless you are willing to pay for server space out of your own pocket, you will have to accept that the site has to appeal to more than just you to survive. And that sometimes means fluff.

Point is, you can just skip over all of those pesky non-review pieces. Since you don't mind waiting for them, and you rather read them than anything else, just click on the "reviews" link and you will get what you say you want. There is no logical reason for you to continue to subject yourself to stuff you don't like, unless you really want to bitch about something.

I know it sounds cliche, but if you don't like it, DON'T READ IT.

But most, including myself, are whores to some degree or another(in fact, I believe I said that more or less).

Still though: why is that a bad thing? Or more importantly (I am not going to get into the "whores = bad" thing), why is it that people who occasionally give in a bit are so horrible? Do you really want service people to tell you what they REALLY think of you? Really, it says more about you that you are quick to call yourself and everyone else a whore for what ... doing an unpleasant job? Apparently Mike Rowe should change the name of his show to "Hey Look, Whores!"

You know who sticks to their guns, no matter what? PETA. And they are fucking annoying and sanctimonious, even causing people who sympathize with them to hate them. If that is the ideal, then screw it, I'd rather be a whore. At least most people like whores (apparently).

Posted by: Vermillion at June 23, 2009 11:33 PM

I know it sounds cliche, but if you don't like it, DON'T READ IT.

I have to agree with Vermillion here... it's one post, per day, and it's labeled as what it is. I don't see how it affects the quality of the reviews or the overall quality of the site. (Actually, the ads are the thing that brings it down a bit, especially the 5-minute long video ones that hang everything else up. Sorry, DR.)

a website for movie reviews

It's actually a lot more than that, and has been for a very long time. The site also reviews books, music and television, and gives us news of upcoming films, books, music, and television. And again I say, it's one post per day of "fluff", and it's labeled; there's no need to read it if you don't want to. Also, there are those of us who don't like to visit gossip blogs (sorry, Stacey!) and would rather have the crap distilled for us to a few interesting or amusing items so we can check them out if we want to.

Just my 2/100 of a dollar (say, why don't they put a "cents" sign on keyboards anymore?).

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at June 24, 2009 11:24 AM

I know it sounds cliche, but if you don't like it, DON'T READ IT.

Fuck that. Come on, now, you know that's a bullshit argument. I could just as easily say that to you about reading my comment.

Apparently Mike Rowe should change the name of his show to "Hey Look, Whores!"

I would love to see a show named that. Are we talking about Dirty Jobs here? To nitpick, I would say that some people like those jobs even if they are disgusting...well, possibly, we don't know either way.

Still though: why is that a bad thing?

I'll put it this way(and, yes, I did recently read Walden): if businesses were more interested in making the best possible products than just profits, the world would be a better place. Of course, that's just my opinion, as was the whore comment.

Finally, and this is a minor point, the 'reviews' link doesn't work very well. Things are mislabeled sometimes and I've seen it act slowly to pick up new things. But I forgive because of the comment preview, which kicks so much ass.


Anna,
TIt's actually a lot more than that, and has been for a very long time.

I'm fairly certain that it started as a movie review site. That's why I came. The reviews of other media make more sense to me than the gossip bullshit. And while I'm sure many people here do like to read them, I'm sure large groups of people here share all sorts of similar interest(like DIY geeks or foodies), but that doesn't mean that they necessarily have a place here. Now, I realize this is just my opinion. To each his own, I like to bitch.

But, I digress:
Hold down the 'Alt' key and use the Numpad, not the number in a rows at the top of the keyboard.

¢ - Alt + 155

and if you're into Spanish:

¿ - Alt + 168
¡ - Alt + 173

Windows only, I don't know about Macs. And check out the Character Map for a complete listing.

Posted by: pissant at June 24, 2009 11:58 AM

There's a character map?!

Maybe I should learn something about how computers and keyboards work someday....

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at June 24, 2009 12:18 PM

Fuck that. Come on, now, you know that's a bullshit argument. I could just as easily say that to you about reading my comment.

Really? You made the point that you didn't mind waiting for reviews, even if there was no other material to bide your time with. If the reviews are the only thing that interest you, then why can't you ignore the rest?

Nobody is making you read the fluff. Even if a review references some other post you didn't read, it isn't like you have to then; folks are happy to explain references right then and there.

Besides, if they did take away the fluff, you wouldn't have anything to bitch about.

Are we talking about Dirty Jobs here? To nitpick, I would say that some people like those jobs even if they are disgusting...well, possibly, we don't know either way.

Ah but liking the job wasn't a qualifier in your definition of a whore. You indicated whores were people who did unpleasant things for more work (and presumably more money). And even in the above line, you don't say they aren't whores. I did say it was apparent you didn't like your job, but that doesn't mean I believe the same for everyone. But that is just nitpicking.

I'll put it this way(and, yes, I did recently read Walden): if businesses were more interested in making the best possible products than just profits, the world would be a better place. Of course, that's just my opinion, as was the whore comment.

How does that translate to somebody faking excitement over a movie? Not that it isn't a good point, just that it really doesn't make much of a difference.

Finally, and this is a minor point, the 'reviews' link doesn't work very well.

Don't they also have the most recent movie reviews in the sidebar (and bottom of the main page) as well? And a site search feature? And really, don't you think that might be a more useful and repairable complaint than "get rid of the stuff I don't like"?

Posted by: Vermillion at June 24, 2009 1:06 PM

It's bullshit because you aren't attacking my argument. I disagree with how the site is being run, just as you disagree with the comments I'm making. I mean, someone could come after you and defend me by saying that you just shouldn't read my comments(or reply, I suppose) if you don't like them. Using your logic, we shouldn't be having this argument/discussion. But, we are. I can't ignore the rest because, I feel, it makes the entire site worse. I gets harder and harder to pick out the peanuts from the turds.

As far as the whole dirty jobs thing, I may have misunderstood your point. Let me just say that I doubt the guy cleaning out shit tankers has too many times a day in which he has to lie to an executive of Shit Tanks Co. about how their shit tankers are much better than the competitions.

How does that translate to somebody faking excitement over a movie?

It's all about making compromises. I mean, maybe if she saw a shitty movie and told them it was and why, they would appreciate it and take that into consideration in the future and continue to give her business. Then, maybe we'd have better movies for children. Then, maybe those kids would grow up and make better things and not accept mediocrity.

Or maybe they'd cut her off completely, who knows? But, fellating(if that's not a word, it should be) them only encourages them to make more shit. I mean, don't you feel like Hollywood, for the most part, is just spinning it's wheels in remake/reboot hell right now? We're not making any progress.

As for your last paragraph, I don't give a fuck how many different ways they have to get the latest stuff, that link is broken, I think. However, if I must take your argument head on, I've found search features are hit and miss, so I don't trust them much. The sidebar is a new thing, I think. That is to say, I was comfortable with the way the review link worked and I would like to interface with the site that way. Giving me other avenues doesn't fix that. That's like a plumber saying that your kitchen sink doesn't really need to be fixed because you have other sinks in the house. You could get water upstairs and carry it back down, but you'd just like your god damn kitchen sink to be working.

Posted by: pissant at June 24, 2009 2:37 PM

Um, my roommate and I totally TiVo'd this and we're halfway through and it's kinda charming in an oh-my-God-did-they-really-just-say-that?!! sort of way. And Gomez beats Lovato in the acting department, though I kinda like that one Lovato song. Catchy stuff.

You gotta love any TV movie centered on an organization to protect the world's princesses that's "funded by the world's royal families." Brilliant.

Posted by: whatBENwatches at June 27, 2009 3:07 AM

Oh, and that features a country that "isn't on most maps." What does that even mean?

Posted by: whatBENwatches at June 28, 2009 1:57 AM

That means it's made up.

Posted by: latiosruby at June 29, 2009 11:05 PM

I'm confused i mean was Demi Lovato's character supposed to be a robot or a Princess...I mean who is really that naive about the world.. Better luck next time she decides to act.. Selena was Great!!

Posted by: TooCooltoShare at July 2, 2009 3:29 PM

I watched it because this movie is an accurate description of noble Mexican heritage, of which I am a part of. You should be ashamed of yourself you racist little girl.

Posted by: uLLorTi at July 4, 2009 2:37 AM

I am a 14 year old girl and when I saw this movie, I thought it was great!!
You people make it sound lyk it was stupid or something ..I thought both girls
were awesome and are who most girls look up to(they're MUCH better than
bitchy Miley). Maybe i kno why yew hated it :
IT WASN'T
MADE FOR
GROWN-UPS!!!

Posted by: CuTiE at July 8, 2009 9:51 AM

I watched it mostly because my little sis called the t.v and had this on.
I thought it was the same-old Disney creativity with a different plot.
It was.
The only thing that REALLY TICKED ME OFF was the fact they were is 'Louisiana.'
I live in Louisiana.
You will find no mountains. You won't even find hills.
So WTF was up with the backdrop?
And a lake? Hello?
And WTS was she crawfishing with? A tube? Who the hell catches crawfish in a tube?
The flippin' school bus went down a hill to pick her up? Hell no. And the dirt roads? Offensive.
The plot was normal Disney failure, but the fact they didn't even brush up on their geography pisses me off.

Posted by: Jordan at July 12, 2009 1:30 PM

u guys should get a life. for Christ sake this is a kids movie and for a kid flick it is pretty gud. Selena and demi are very talented young actors if given gud opportunities they can be even better. they can sing they can act. ask ur selves u morons could u do those things when u were there age. or even now.. all u can do is sit around and criticise other peoples hard work.

Posted by: ab at August 15, 2009 1:33 PM