Or was anyone else confused by this write-up? I didn't understand one thing Mr. Patterson wrote in his review. Maybe that's owing to the crappy movie, or the lack of material with which to work, or whatever. But none of this article registered with me. Something about a goat in space...Keanu Reeves...Nickelodeon...dunno. How odd.

Yeah, there seemed to be a lot of words, but...not sure...anyway, I just assumed that the review was a clever mimesis of the viewing experience. It sounds like the miniseries is all over the map. There's some kind of agent's party in the beginning? then Maya Rudolph? then Untouchables?

Hmm

Troy probably had too many bong hits to write coherently, but you can't blame him - he had to get through three hours of Chris Kattan somehow

hahaha yeah, I would probably need to get mind numblingly high and make a game of taking a shot of whiskey every time....something happened...maybe?... just to get through 20 minutes of this/or him on SNL.

God he's atrocious.

Not just you at all.

But a question: Do you think this article is really any different than anything else Mr. Patterson has written? He's not a writer. He's a guy who likes to make random allusions, stir in a few (unnecessarily) fancy words, and collect a paycheck. Am I wrong?

The article is in every way funnier than the subject. I mean, the accusation that he poorly-played the testicular-bonk scene: That's funny, because it suggests the low degree of cinimatic possibility there really seems to be for Mr. Kataan.

You guys' (what the heck is going on ? with all these words) reminds me of the characters in the Mike Judge film "Idiocracy." Maya Rudolph was in that one too.

Whether or not you think this article constitutes good television criticism, it is actually coherent. Judging from this thread, you'd think he just threw in a bunch of non sequiturs. I re-read it, and it makes sense.

Next time you might try a criticism that doesn't insult your own intelligence.