Well, Patrick Goldstein is at it again.
Once again, he's penning ignorant musings for the morning daily, to satisfy his overblown sense of self-importance.
Just a few days ago, everyone was savoring a big chuckle over a silly piece he threw together on the Roger Ebert scandal.
If you recall, Roger Ebert confessed on his blog, that a nifty review on the feature - Tru Loved - was crafted without disclosing the fact the rotund little critic only screened about eight minutes of celluloid.
In response, Mr. Goldstein jumped into the fray (to rustle up some much-needed publicity for himself, no doubt. Poor baby!) and wildly predicted that Ebert's shame-faced admission would spark trouble for all critics around the country.
As I quipped at the time, baloney!
When I opened the newspaper and turned to the Calendar section and started to peruse his latest article this morning, I literally laughed out loud!
After noting that he attended a screening of a comedy this past week (Role Models), the ingenuous hack proceeded to ponder why the Academy didn't award more Oscars to that popular genre.
Duh!
In fact - he noted in the overly-long shallow piece - that after the screening he found himself "wondering" why the Oscars didn't recognize good work in comedy the way they do drama, animation, cinematography, editing (oh boy, he left no stone unturned on this one) - etc. etc. and so forth and so on!The man is a piece of work, isn't he?
For starters, the subject he was whining about has been thoroughly covered - ad nauseam - for about two decades by a handful of top entertainment writers in the industry.
More galling, perhaps, is Goldstein's deceitful bold-faced effort to conjure up the impression that his take on the issue is a fresh insight!
Mr. Goldstein, do you honestly think everyone in the biz has lived in a vacuum for the past twenty years?
Or, just maybe, you thought we were born yesterday?
At this juncture, I think it's obvious why the Los Angeles Times is losing credibility (and suffering circulation losses) in recent months.
Who wants to read the tired old news that Mr. Goldstein is offering up under the pretense that it is his own original thought-provoking material?
Years ago, Frank Sinatra caught a lot of flack from the media for referring to journalists as a bunch of hookers.
In Mr. Goldstein's case, the label is right on the money.
If I was the managing editor at the daily, I would give Goldstein's butt a swift kick into the "Want ads" department.
His writing would be better-suited for drafting copy for used cars.
After all, his propensity for selling pre-owned properties, makes him well-suited for the task.
No comments:
Post a Comment