This evening I found something interesting while trawling my favorite message board. (I suppose the correct term here would be "trawling" but this was a message board for fans of troll dolls and it's kind of an inside joke among us Holy Trawlers. Yes, we call ourselves Holy Trawlers. I realize that probably seems confusing.) Someone had posted a review of the new RAMBO film and here's what he had to say: "RAMBO was great."

First of all, SPOILER ALERT! Also, you are an idiot...OR A GENIUS. Because, in a way, wouldn't it almost be wasteful to back up an opinion of a movie like RAMBO with 1000 well-considered words full of supporting arguments, critical insight, and style? Chances are, no one put that kind of attention into making the movie RAMBO. It is likely that the two hardest working people involved in that film were the guy whose job it was to fill condoms with Caro syrup and food coloring, and the needle whose job it was to fill Sylvester Stallone's ass cheeks with human growth hormone. (Snap! [spoken in old asian guy voice] "Levin wins...BURN-ALITY!")

It would be perfectly fine if, instead of having to fill a few column inches with a thoughtful review of RAMBO or MEET THE SPARTANS or TYLER PERRY PRESENTS TYLER PERRY'S 'GOD DON'T RAISE NO FOOLS', critics like A.O. Scott could just write something pithy like "awesome!" or "stank" or "{ETERNAL FART NOISE}" and then allow themselves more time to review movies that people actually might talk about when they walk out of the theater. That way people could accurately quote reviewers' assessments of films back to friends and blind dates as if they are their own opinions, and do it in a way that seems more honest.

[Update: for anyone else who thinks they're game to write a RAMBO review, THIS IS HOW IT'S DONE. P.S. least convincing movie review handle ever.]