PUNCH-DRUNK MUSINGS - Finally, the Feedback Forum erupts...well, a little bit anyway. Margaret Mead rightfully takes me to task for so infrequently updating my blog -- as tempted as I am to explain that I'm really not a slacker, I'm sticking to my pledge to just talk about movies. She suggests that maybe her and other readers "can spur CinemaScoped to write about something if we post about it enough." Why yes, you can! I'm much more likely to find a few minutes to post if I am directly responding to a comment or point by someone else. The reason being that I'm hopelessly unoriginal and do not take well to criticism. So on that note, let's take a look at Margaret's post point by point. First, she's sick of 'Punch-Drunk Love' "because of the incessant marketing campaign, but also this 'revelation' critics seem to be having about Sandler, and how P.T. Anderson saw something in him that no one else did. What was that, a big name for the marquee?" OK, on this point, I think it's safe to say that whatever reason(s) P.T. had for casting Sandler were not related to box office. Sure, some people might waste $7-10 to see Sandler try to "act," but the fact is that none of Sandler's usual audience -- roughly 10-to-22-year old boys -- are going to waste their money on this movie, regardless of Sandler's name. Without having seen the movie yet myself -- going tonight! -- i think P.T. was just set on making a completely different kind of movie. He hints at this on the 'Magnolia' DVD, that after semi-epics like that movie and 'Boogie Nights', where you are directing countless talented, "serious" actors, making a 95-minute romantic comedy/drama with Adam Sandler is about as different as you can get. Margaret writes: "Hey, I believe guys can change their image, but this isn't the first time we've heard Anderson is a genius. And if Sandler ever showed me one shred of acting chops before this, maybe I wouldn't be ranting." The implication here, seems to me anyway, is that we've heard P.T. is a genius before and he hasn't proven worthy of the title. Well, I say he has. I don't have the time or energy to expound on why 'Hard Eight', 'Boogie Nights' and 'Magnolia' are three amazing films, but I will always give a P.T. Anderson movie the benefit of the doubt until he proves otherwise. And who knows, maybe 'Punch-Drunk' won't do it for me. You'll be the first to know. As for Sandler, he's never shown a shred of acting chops before because, well, his films only require him to act like a clown. Then again, acting like a clown is still acting. Hell, maybe Roger Ebert is right: "The film is exhilarating to watch because Sandler, liberated from the constraints of formula, reveals unexpected depths as an actor." 'Sick too' follows up Margaret's post by pointing out that the movie is getting ripped by critics on Rotten Tomatoes...except, it's not. In fact, they're fawning all over it. My guess is that at the time he/she checked, only a handful of reviews were posted with the rest being added today (the day of its release). As it turns out, 74 out of 91 reviews are positive, with the only heavyweight disapproval coming from J. Hoberman of the Village Voice: "As elegantly crafted as it often is, Anderson's movie is essentially a one-trick pony that, hampered by an undeveloped script, ultimately pulls up lame." Anyway, keep the feedback coming...

E-mail CinemaScoped@hotmail.com or start a discussion in the Feedback Forum