Four Times Movie Reviews Got Uncomfortably Horny
For as long as there have been moving images, there have been people publicly dunking on them for money (even that train pulling into a station likely had its detractors). Film criticism boasts a long history of treasured cinematic insights, from the writings of Pauline Kael, to Leonard Maltin’s mammoth movie guides, to the time Siskel & Ebert ripped on Chevy Chase movies while Chevy Chase was sitting like two feet away.
But the field of film criticism is certainly far from perfect. For one thing, it remains a disproportionately male-dominated industry, with studies showing that men “account for 69 percent of critics,” which could explain the recent trend of film reviews that are way too horny for their own good. We’re not talking about reviews of romance movies or erotic thrillers, critics have injected their personal fantasies — and also, occasionally, their general ickiness — into reviews that really don’t call for it, such as how…
You might expect that a review of Pixar’s Incredibles 2 would highlight the movie’s impressive animation and top-notch voice cast, while, in no way, bringing up the subject of boners.
Then came The New Yorker’s review by Anthony Lane. Clearly, Lane has a thing for Helen Parr, aka Elastigirl – and while we certainly don’t want to kink-shame anybody’s fetish for thicc CGI superheroes, the review sure takes some bizarrely horned-up detours. It goes on to vividly describe how moviegoers should keep an ear out for the “shifty sound” of amorous parents “squirming awkwardly beside their enraptured offspring.”
According to Lane, “Mommy” might whisper to “Daddy” that Elastigirl resembles the protagonist from Fifty Shades of Grey, at which point, her husband would have to place his “cooling soda firmly in his lap,” presumably to keep from getting a raging hard-on while watching a movie from the studio behind Finding Nemo.
Worse, he further eroticizes a scene that’s literally just two female characters talking to one another, suggesting that one should “watch out for flying popcorn,” because… it’s impossible to watch two cartoon women converse without getting a snack-ruining erection?
‘The Hollywood Reporter’ Criticized the Lack of ‘Hormones’ in (Checks Notes) the ‘Dora the Explorer’ Movie
Seemingly based on a fake internet trailer, in 2019 we got a big screen adaptation of Dora the Explorer that featured Indiana Jones-esque action because teaching preschoolers how to count to 10 in Spanish simply doesn’t put butts in seats.
The Hollywood Reporter’s review of Dora and the Lost City of Gold had some issues with the movie. No, not the CGI monkey voiced by Danny Trejo, they were more concerned that the movie – which we can’t stress enough stars Dora the Explorer – has a distinct lack of “hormones.”
Writer Todd McCarthy sums up his feelings about The Lost City of Gold by noting that lead actress Isabela Moner was actually 18 and “looks it despite preventive measures.” Also her co-star, Mark Wahlberg’s nephew Jeff, was 19. Why is this a problem? Because “the director seems to be trying to keep the hormones at bay, but there are some things you just can’t disguise, perhaps human nature first and foremost.” Umm, what??
McCarthy then says that “Dora seems committed to projecting a pre-sexualized version of youth, while throbbing unacknowledged beneath the surface is something a bit more real, its presence rigorously ignored.” And apparently the Hollywood Reporter’s editorial staff was 100 percent totally cool with printing the word “throbbing” in a sentence bemoaning the lack of sexuality in a movie starring beloved children’s cartoon characters.
’The Guardian’s ‘Black Widow’ Review Read Like a Harlequin Romance Novel
The isolation of the pandemic and the release of a movie about women in skin-tight leather outfits is seemingly what led to the controversial Guardian review of Black Widow that began by praising the “sensuous cough-syrup purr of Scarlett Johansson’s voice,” which writer Peter Bradshaw admits: “is something I’ve missed during lockdown.” Dude, just rent Her and keep it to your self.
While the rest of the review managed to keep it in its pants, many readers blasted the “creepy” and “fucking gross” nature of the review, which arguably compounded the institutionalized sexism that blocked a Black Widow movie from being made for years. After all, it’s not like any other Marvel movie reviews began with a whole paragraph waxing about Thor’s smile or Captain America’s ass.
Disgraced Critic Harry Knowles Turned His ‘Blade II’ Review into a Treatise on Cunnilingus
We need to first acknowledge that the founder of the late ‘90s pop-culture website Ain’t it Cool News, Harry Knowles, has been accused of sexual assault and harassment by multiple women (which he has denied). But if we were to judge him based purely on his work, well, it also happens to be terrible.
Perhaps the clearest example of Knowles’ journalistic awfulness is his 2002 reaction to Guillermo del Toro’s Blade II, which some have justifiably branded “the worst movie review ever.”
The review opens with the declaration that Knowles’ article about this R-rated movie is going to be “NC-17.” Knowles then randomly proclaims, “I believe Guillermo Del Toro eats pussy better than any man alive,” further using graphic descriptions of cunnilingus as a belabored, completely baffling metaphor for his enjoyment of a Wesley Snipes vampire movie.
“BLADE 2 is the tongue, mouth, fingers and lips of a lover,” Knowles writes. “The audience is the clit. Watch your audience. This is where Guillermo Del Toro goes down on the audience.” This goes on for a while, continuing: “Guillermo hears them begging no more, when he decides to stop for a moment, there is that relaxed calm… The audience relaxes… labored breathing… a sated smile, WHEN SUDDENLY THE RELENTLESS BASTARD IS AT IT AGAIN!!!!” Which would be gross even coming from a writer who wasn’t allegedly harassing women behind the scenes.
Knowles thankfully restrained himself from penning a follow-up review comparing Blade: Trinity to a listless hand job in an alley behind a 7-Eleven.
You (yes, you) should follow JM on Twitter (if it still exists by the time you’re reading this).
