We enabled comments on this blog a few weeks back, and now the process has been implemented throughout the entire site. That means you can now post a comment on any “Snide Remarks” column or movie review, old or new. Heck, you could go back and post comments on very old, pre-”Snide Remarks” columns or theater reviews if you wanted to. Any article on the site! The world is your oyster!

Note that this is a reversal of our previous position, which was that we didn’t care what you thought. Now we care, deeply.

Kudos to my li’l bro Jeff for doing the geek work involved in making this happen. Also, kudos to me for writing big piles of words for people to comment on.

Comment away!

(Standard rules apply: No cussing, no vulgarity, no fighting. Comments from first-time contributors are subject to approval before they are posted. Spammers will be hunted and killed by mercenaries. If symptoms persist, discontinue use and consult a physician. Apply directly to the forehead.)

I’m not very enthusiastic about any of this week’s new releases, so I don’t expect you to be, either. Let’s run them down quickly and never speak of them again, shall we?

The biggest release (at least in terms of number of theaters) is “The Grudge 2,” the sequel to the 2004 hit, which was itself a remake of a Japanese film. The original Japanese film spawned a sequel, too, but this is not a remake of it, because the Japanese sequel had a completely different story from this one. Although I don’t know how different it could have been, considering all of these movies focus exclusively on Japanese ghosts who pop up unexpectedly and frighten you. I mean, there’s only so much you can do with that.

“The Grudge 2″ wasn’t screened until last night at 10 p.m., thus ensuring there would be no reviews in the papers today. If you’re a savvy moviegoer and/or a regular reader of this Web site, you know what that means: It blows, and the studio knows it.

The screening was populated almost entirely by teenagers, so the theater was perpetually aglow from the light of their cell phones. I submit that any text message sent to a teenager is, by definition, not urgent enough to require being read during a movie. If the message were urgent, it would have been sent to a grown-up.

Anyway, speaking of things that blow, next up is “Man of the Year,” a lame, toothless comedy starring Robin Williams as a Jon Stewart-esque comedian who gets elected president. The fundamental problem with the film is that its main character is supposed to be hilariously funny, yet every example of his humor that is shown to us is, in fact, NOT FUNNY. Note to people who make movies: If you want them to be funny, you should not let Robin Williams write his own material.

This one screened a few weeks ago — very early, for some reason — and I remember two things about it. One, the only people in the theater who laughed at Williams’ bland brand of humor were old people. Two, Mike Russell, Dawn Taylor and I got shushed for laughing too much at Christopher Walken. The problem, you see, is that we think everything he says is funny; ergo, every time he spoke, we laughed. Hey, sometimes you gotta make your own fun. At least we weren’t checking our G.D. text messages.

The other wide release today is “The Marine,” in which WWE star John Cena plays, um, a Marine, I guess. I quote from the trailer: “Meet a one-man strike force that never surrenders!” If you’re wondering why that line sounds familiar, it’s because you’ve heard it in every action-movie trailer ever made. Anyway, Cena’s wife gets kidnapped and he has to rescue her, or something. Twentieth Century Fox didn’t screen it at all, not even last night at 10 p.m., so you know it’s extra-special. I’m guessing it will appeal most to fans of professional wrestling, which means if you can read this, you’re probably not interested. KA-ZING!

All the latest reviews, DVD releases and lots of other movie-related stuff will be e-mailed to you every Friday if you will but subscribe to Eric D. Snider’s “In the Dark.” To fail to not subscribe would not fail to be unbad.

Some people on a certain message board were making mix CDs for each other in a flagrant violation of copyright laws, and I got to thinking what I would include if I were to make a mix CD to send to all my friends. It should have a particular theme, I thought, and the theme I chose was: Happy Songs.

These are songs that make me happy. In most cases, it’s because they’re just so darn peppy that I always feel like dancing when I hear them. (Please note that I seldom dance in public. But I often WANT to.) Some of them even go a little beyond that, with moods and melodies that actually inspire me, in addition to being toe-tappers.

So here’s the track list for my mix CD. I’ve uploaded it as an iMix at iTunes (follow this link), where you can hear 30-second samples and download songs if you want to.

What tunes would you put on your Happy Songs iMix? Discuss.

1. “Bizarre Love Triangle,” New Order (1986). This is probably my favorite song from the 1980s New Wave movement. The mix of drums (OK, drum machines) and strings (OK, synthesized strings) is the very definition of dance-floor happiness. (There are extended versions, but I prefer the 3:51 original.)

2. “Hey Julie,” Fountains of Wayne (2003). One of the few songs on this list whose lyrics matter. (In most cases, it’s just the music I love.) Not only is the tune catchy and cute, but the lyrics are sweet and heartfelt, about this swell gal who helps make the guy’s life livable.

3. “Hey Ya,” Outkast (2003). Man, did this thing get overplayed in 2003 and 2004. But man, is it ever a fun song.

4. “All of Me,” Jon Schmidt (1991). This is a piano solo by Jon Schmidt, a Utah native whose music is somewhere between pop-rock and Mannheim Steamroller. Some of his compositions could be considered schmaltzy, but “All of Me” is a brilliant piece of work. After a tranquil opening, it launches into a rapid-fire barrage of harmonies and counter-rhythms, as catchy and energizing a song as I’ve ever heard. Every time I hear it, I catch some new rhythm or melody I hadn’t noticed before.

5. “Hourglass,” Squeeze (1987). I defy you not to tap your toes or bob your head. Oh, and sing along with the patter-y chorus.

6. “Starry Eyed Surprise,” Paul Oakenfold, vocals by Shifty Shellshock (2002). In this case, it’s not that the song makes me “happy,” exactly, but that it’s impossible for me not to boogie just a little when I hear it. When I used to do music for ComedySportz in Provo, I would often play this song as exit music after a show. As the audience filed out, I would always see many of them dancing as they did.

7. “Best of My Love,” the Emotions (1977). One year at the Sundance Film Festival’s low-key, super-fun awards ceremony, a technical glitch caused a delay in starting the show. To keep the energy up and everyone happy, they told us to stand up at our seats and dance (“Sun-dance,” get it?). This is the song they played, and sure enough, everyone danced, including Roger Ebert.

8. “Sing, Sing, Sing,” Benny Goodman (1937). You’ve definitely heard this swing tune, whether you know the name or not. It has lyrics, but the best recordings don’t use ‘em. Not only do I want to dance when I hear Goodman’s version, I want to be a bandleader, too.

9. “I’m the Man Who Loves You,” Wilco (2002). A little bluesy (what with all those 7th chords and the general structure), a little rock ‘n’ roll, even a little country. It feels groovy, you know? Oh, and the words are about a guy who is trying to put his feelings into a letter, but he can’t seem to do it. “If I could, you know I would just hold your hand and you’d understand I’m the man who loves you.” Beautiful.

10. “Walking on Sunshine,” Katrina and the Waves (1985). Overused? Overplayed? Yes. Ridiculously upbeat and shiny? You betcha!

11. “New York City,” They Might Be Giants (1996). I could put one of about 30 different TMBG songs on this list; the band is practically synonymous with fun, catchy tunes. But this one (a cover of a song by the defunct girl group Cub) is one of my favorites, with happy and sentimental lyrics about one of my favorite places in the world.

12. “In Between Days,” Ben Folds (2003). Another cover, this time of a song by the Cure. I like the original, but I love Ben Folds’ piano-tastic version. The syncopated rhythm of the main piano riff played against the steady beat of the drums is great.

13. “Do Your Thing,” Basement Jaxx (2003). Some of the best dance songs are about dancing. (See also: “Starry Eyed Surprise.”) This one says the best way to get happy is to shake your money-maker (or words to that effect). It’s the piano-heavy sample that makes it a stand-out, though.

14. “Right Back Where We Started From,” Maxine Nightingale (1976). You hear this one a lot in movies. It’s a good all-purpose feel-good happy song.

15. “We Close Our Eyes,” Oingo Boingo (1987). I’m not a huge fan of Oingo Boingo’s particular brand of ’80s synthesized merriment, but this song’s hummable tune and earnest lyrics always put a smile on my face.

16. “You Got It,” Roy Orbison (1988). Orbison’s career spanned 30 years, and this was one of the last songs he recorded. The lyrics are simply sweet (“Anything you want, you got it”), and the chord progression in the chorus gives the song an added plaintiveness.

17. “Friday I’m in Love,” The Cure (1992). The Cure is most famous, and rightfully so, for being depressing. But this song is just the opposite: One of the things I like best about it is that the upbeat tempo never stops, not for a bridge, not for a coda, never. It starts happy, and it’s happy for the whole 3 1/2 minutes. It perfectly captures the thrilling feeling of being in love.

18. “Endicott,” Kid Creole & the Coconuts (1985). This delightful island-tinged dance tune came to my attention when the video for it was featured in a Dr. Demento TV special many years ago. (It’s not a particularly “funny” song, but it is lighthearted.) It’s the bass line that makes your bootie shake.

19. “Murder (or a Heart Attack),” Old 97s (1999). More relentlessly peppy music. Just fun.

20. “Mr. Brightside (Jacques Lu Cont’s Thin White Duke Mix),” The Killers (2005). Jacques Lu Cont is a producer and DJ whose real name is Stuart Price. The Killers’ album version of this song is great, but this 9-minute remix expands on it in amazing ways, somehow making it feel introspective, anthemic and hopeful all at once. (The 30-second sample iTunes uses doesn’t accurately represent the song, though, because the drums haven’t kicked in yet.)

“30 Rock” (Wednesdays, NBC): This is the other new series set backstage at a live sketch comedy show, written by and starring Tina Fey, who until May was the head writer at “Saturday Night Live.” Unlike “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip,” “30 Rock” is a half-hour comedy (not dramedy), and the pilot got quite a few laughs from me. Fey plays the head writer at “The Girlie Show,” and a new executive (Alec Baldwin) has convinced her to hire insane movie star Tracy Jordan (Tracy Morgan) as a cast member. Alec Baldwin is perfect for this role, and I’ve always liked Fey and Morgan. This one’s a keeper. TiVo verdict: Season Pass.

“Twenty Good Years” (Wednesdays, NBC): Wow. Of all the derivative, unfunny, insulting, dim-witted sitcoms I’ve ever seen, this one’s right up there. Jeffrey Tambor and John Lithgow — both funny in other series — play two old friends who, at age 60, decide to start living every day to the fullest. The jokes in the pilot JUST. WEREN’T. FUNNY. As in, not a single laugh the entire episode (though that didn’t stop the editors from inserting rampant amounts of grating canned laughter). Tambor went from “Arrested Development” to this. It makes me sad to think how embarrassed he must feel. TiVo verdict: It isn’t just one of the worst TV shows I’ve ever seen. It’s one of the worst THINGS I’ve ever seen.

“Ugly Betty” (Thursdays, ABC): Among new series this fall, this one is the most popular, its first two episodes drawing enough viewers to put it in the top 20. I’m afraid I don’t share America’s sentiments on this one. It’s a cute, campy dramedy about a frumpy, unattractive Latina girl who gets a job at a fashion magazine. (Yes, it’s just like “The Devil Wears Prada,” although “Ugly Betty” is based on a Colombian series that pre-dates “Prada.”) I found the pilot just too precious and whimsical, with a cartoonish musical score and big, broad acting. TiVo verdict: I will continue to enforce my “no ugly chicks” policy.

“Friday Night Lights” (Tuesdays, NBC): I greatly admired the film that inspired this series, about a small Texas town where high school football is king, and the pilot episode — written and directed by Peter Berg, who wrote and directed the film, too — was among the best two or three pilots of any show this season. The drama, passion and intensity of the sport were powerfully conveyed, along with the humanity of the players and the coach. Don’t care about sports? ME EITHER! But I still found it gripping. TiVo verdict: Season Pass.

“The Nine” (Wednesdays, ABC): I’m intrigued, but I’m wary. The premise is that nine people were held hostage during a bank robbery for 52 hours before the ordeal ended. They bonded during that time, and of course now their lives are forever changed. What we don’t know, yet, is exactly what happened in those 52 hours. The first episode hinted tantalizingly at a few things — an off-duty cop wound up handcuffed to a pillar; the bad guys cut off locks of two women’s hair — but mostly the focus is on the aftermath, not on the crisis itself. Will it become an emotional melodrama, or a creepy mystery? TiVo verdict: I’m going to give it another couple episodes.

If you had ABC’s “Brothers & Sisters” in the office betting pool for which new series would be canceled first — and most people did — surprise! You’re wrong!

Turns out it’s CBS’s “Smith” that has the dubious honor of being the first axing of the fall season, having been yanked after just three airings. Ray Liotta’s a great actor, and it would be swell to see him on TV every week, but I guess we’ll have to wait. In the meantime, he’ll presumably go back to beating in people’s heads with baseball bats on the silver screen.

Of course, over at Fox there’s a chance some shows have been canceled without the next of kin being informed yet. See, everything on Fox is on hiatus right now because of post-season baseball coverage, and there’s some speculation that, much like the father who went out for a pack of cigarettes and never came back, “Justice” and “Happy Hour” won’t return when the hiatus is over.

It’s a pretty nice arrangement for Fox, really. By covering baseball in October, they have a way of quietly murdering some of their underperforming series. Who’s gonna notice if one or two shows don’t actually come back after the World Series?

NBC, meanwhile, has moved its underperforming “Kidnapped” to Saturday night (starting Oct. 21). SATURDAY?! If you weren’t aware, Saturday is the graveyard. The networks have openly and without any attempt to spin it otherwise GIVEN UP on Saturday night programming. They air repeats, sports and news programs in that block. The most-viewed show on a Saturday usually gets no more than about 5 million viewers, and it’s mostly people age 50 and over.

Which means putting “Kidnapped” there is actually very magnanimous on NBC’s part. It’s an ongoing mystery show, so the few million viewers who are watching are highly invested in it. NBC has told the producers to wrap everything up in 13 episodes, and apparently the plan is to air them on Saturdays. Viewers still get to see how things turn out, and NBC frees up space on the other nights to air less-feeble shows.

In case you’re still getting used to how we roll here at EricDSnider.com, this is your reminder that since it’s Monday, and since I didn’t get distracted by a shiny object over the weekend, there is a new “Snide Remarks” column posted for your enjoyment.

We have a backlog of Angry Letters to sort through, so put on your asbestos gloves and protective goggles and let’s get to reading!

First a quick one from someone who used the form on the E-mail Eric page. He marked “general” as the subject, so I don’t know what his letter is in response to. In the “name” field, he put “SNIDERHATER.” For “e-mail address,” he put “sniderhater@yahoo.com.” (I checked; this is not a real e-mail address, sadly.) He writes:

Try to talk yourself out of this…

YOU’RE A [nickname for RICHARD]!

SNIDERHATER makes a lot of good points here and I will not attempt to refute them. Sure, he’s an anonymous coward — I may be a Richard, but at least I sign my name to my work and tell people how to contact me — but he’s an anonymous coward who speaks the truth. I am cut to the quick. Touché, SNIDERHATER. Touché.

The stupidity of this next writer was affirmed before I even read her letter: She had sent the e-mail not through my e-mail page, but through the “Ask Eric Stuff” page, which is quite clearly labeled as a place that is ONLY for non-serious questions that you intend as setups for “Snide Remarks” jokes. If you have an ACTUAL comment or question, the “Ask Eric Stuff” page is not the place to send it. There’s not even a spot on the “Ask Eric Stuff” page for you to include your e-mail address, so how would I reply?

Anyway, the person signed her name “Gertrude Irvingale,” which clearly is not real. But here’s what she had to say:

I just have a teensy question. I read the movie reviews for Channing Tatum and I think that you rated all the movies wrongly… or at least most of them. I realize that this is just your opinion but I think you desperately need to reevaluate your movie reviews if you wish to look cool and stuff like that, u no?

Ha Ha

Ha ha indeed! I’m sure Gertrude Irvingale is right, actually. If I wish to look cool to 15-year-old girls (which I assume she is), then yes, I should probably start evaluating Channing Tatum’s movies differently, i.e., I should give them all A+ grades because Channing Tatum is SUPA FIIIIINNNE! DAYUMN!!!

He’s actually not a bad actor at all. In “A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints” (just now being released in select theaters), he plays a conflicted Italian-American kid (!) and is pretty impressive in the role. I think it may be a breakthrough for him after paying his dues with crap like “Supercross” and “She’s the Man.” I suspect “A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints” is the film Gertrude thinks I got “right” (I gave it a B, the highest of any Channing Tatum film), yet ironically, I doubt she would enjoy it, what with the serious plot and believable characters and intelligent dialogue and so forth. He does have his shirt off a couple times, though, so maybe it would win her over.

But it is foolish to spend time belittling pseudonymous teenagers when there are grown-ups to harass. Here’s what a fellow named Bill had to say about my review of the current Will Ferrell opus:

You have lost your mind and should not be allowed a forum to review any more movies. That was the worst movie of all time (or tied with some others). What a useless waste of film production and distribution. Not funny, entertaining, or amusing, with some very twisted gender bending, not to mention JUST BAD ACTING. THE FILM STUNK.
Even my daughter hated it. Did somebody pay you to give this pile of crap a good review? Go back to film school and work on your studies a bit more before you review anything again. Thank you. Bill

It happened to be my birthday the day I got this, and I was feeling playful. So I sent this reply:

You have lost your mind and should not be allowed a forum to send any more e-mails. That was the worst response to a review I’ve ever read. What a waste of time. Did someone pay you to send me that e-mail? Go back to e-mail school and work on your studies a bit more before you respond to any more reviews. Thank you.

I’m thinking of using that as a form letter, actually.

Next up: An e-mail from someone whose “From” line says Sean, though his e-mail address is john811416usa@netscape.net. Maybe his name is Sean John. He didn’t sign it at all, so it’s hard to say. In fact, the e-mail itself was vague. It reads:

What do you base your reviews on? Are you, or were you an actor at anytime? How long have you been doing this? You seem to be a real punk, who loves attention and needs a swift kick in the [donkey]. YOUR website is boring, kind of like your reviews. Your writing has no creativity and needs a lot of work. And by the way, who in the hell would buy your crap anyway? My advice, go back to starbucks, if you really apply yourself, you just might make assistant manager in about 7-years! You’re Pathetic

Actually, now that I look at it, the capitalization of “You’re Pathetic” and the fact that it occurs at the end of the e-mail makes me think maybe that’s his name. Hmm.

My response to You’re Pathetic was as follows:

Thank you for your mature, well-reasoned e-mail.

To answer your questions, I am not an actor, and I have been reviewing movies since 1999.

Was there a particular review that angered you? Or just life in general?

He did not reply. Once again I fail to understand how someone can become so enraged by a mere movie review. Oh well. Back to Starbucks with me!

Martin Scorsese makes films often enough that a new one isn’t an “event,” exactly, but it does pique a film lover’s interest, especially in an otherwise dry season. “The Departed” is a great movie, nearly as good (but not quite) as Scorsese’s “Goodfellas” and “Taxi Driver.”

Even better: It’s set in Boston, with lots of thick, juicy Boston accents. The title itself is actually pronounced “The De-pah-ted.” Say it! It’s fun!

Among the wide releases, that’s the only good news I have for you, unless a confirmation of your suspicions is considered good news. If it is, then you’ll be pleased to know that “Employee of the Month” and “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning” are, in fact, as bad as you thought they would be.

The latter was not screened until last night, to avoid opening-day reviews while also avoiding the stigma of not having a screening at all. This is standard operating procedure these days for horror films. In fact, plenty of horror films DON’T have screenings, or when they do, they don’t tell critics about them. But we were actually invited to last night’s last-minute screening, so kudos to New Line for that.

As for “Employee of the Month,” well, interesting story. I e-mailed the publicist last week to see when screenings would be, and she said there weren’t going to be any. It turns out this is what we in the business call a “lie,” because in fact there were two screenings, one last Thursday and one this past Wednesday. I knew about the Wednesday one because there was an ad in one of the local weekly papers telling people where they could pick up their free passes to it.

Note to publicists: If you tell us there isn’t a screening, we’ll be more likely to believe you if you don’t also take out an ad in the paper saying there is.

Anyway, now that I’ve seen the film, I can understand why they tried to hide its existence from critics, the same way poor Leatherface’s mama tossed him in a trash bin after birthing him on the floor of a slaughterhouse (sorry for the “Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning” spoilers there).

Among smaller releases, there is a documentary you should be aware of called “Jesus Camp,” about evangelical Christians and their children. One of my fellow critics was raised in such a family — Pentecostal, “holy roller,” whatever your preferred terminology is — and he said watching the film definitely hit home. (He has since left the faith.) He speculated beforehand that I, having been raised Mormon, might see some of my own childhood in the movie. I said, “From what I know of the movie, I think it’s the way people think Mormons are, but not how they actually are.”

That turned out to be fairly accurate. I saw a few parallels in the way the evangelicals teach their children and the way Mormons do, but not many. The film depicts the kids, all under age 12, as being awfully intense about their faith, weeping and hollering and speaking in tongues at prayer meetings the way their parents do. In interviews, they talk as seriously as any grown-up would. I kept thinking: Where is the FUN in this childhood?

For as weird as people think Mormons are, the children’s programs in the church are pretty normal. You sing songs teaching very basic ideas (God loves you, be more like Jesus, be nice to others, etc.), you sing other songs just for fun, and you learn child-sized bits of doctrine (see previous: God, Jesus, nice, etc.).

The youth minister in the movie preaches against the evils of most popular culture, saying “had it been in the Old Testament, Harry Potter would have been PUT TO DEATH!” The only real parallel to my childhood that I could think of was a woman telling us that arcade games (this was the era of Pac-Man) were of the devil — but this was a woman everyone, our parents included, thought was a fanatical crazy person.

Then there’s a scene where a bunch of the boys, about 10 years old, are in their cabin at Bible camp, laughing and telling ghost stories and just being boys. One of the adult counselors comes in and says he doesn’t think ghost stories “honor God” and maybe they shouldn’t tell them. I thought of the camp-outs I went on as a kid. Did anyone ever tell us not to tell ghost stories? Or did they JUST LEAVE US ALONE AND LET US BE KIDS, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD?! I believe it was the latter.

There’s an article in today’s New York Times (free registration might be required) about how evangelical Christians fear they’re losing their teenagers. What’s interesting is that as my aforementioned critic friend and I left the screening of “Jesus Camp,” he said, “You know, those kids are gonna grow up, and they’re going to be mad, and they’re going to leave the church.” I could see what he meant, and the Times story seems to confirm it. Creating such an intense, un-fun atmosphere for kids when they’re supposed to be enjoying their childhood could make them turn bitter later on. I understand wanting to teach them good Christian principles, but maybe there is such a thing as over-doing it.

Anyway, anyone with a Christian background will probably find the film interesting and provocative. Keep an eye out for when it opens in your area.

As always, you’ll find these reviews and much, much more fabulous information in this week’s “In the Dark,” a weekly e-zine chock-full of such things. Do sign up, won’t you?

The funniest movie I’ve seen all year is “Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan.” If something funnier happens between now and Dec. 31, I will be greatly surprised. It’s the sort of film for which the word “riotous” was invented. It’s crazy, anarchic, clever, brilliantly composed satire/sketch/scatalogical humor. It has at least one scene that people will be talking about for years, the way they talk about “the hair gel scene” in “There’s Something About Mary” or “the campfire farting scene” in “Blazing Saddles.” For “Borat,” they’ll be talking about “the naked hotel room fight scene.”

Borat is a character created by Sacha Baron Cohen, a British comic whose “Da Ali G Show” has aired on HBO and who was recently seen as Will Ferrell’s French opponent in “Talladega Nights.” I’ve always thought his Ali G persona gets old fast, while Borat is the standout character, so I was delighted to learn Baron Cohen had made a film based on him. (There was an Ali G film a few years ago, but it was never released stateside.)

The deal with Borat is he’s a Kazakhstan TV news reporter who visits America to learn about our culture. His English is hilariously fractured, and he’s portrayed as a misogynistic, racist, anti-Semitic homophobe, the joke being that that’s just how people ARE in Kazakhstan. (Oh, they hate/fear Gypsies and Uzbekistanis, too.) Borat speaks of his native country in terms that paint it as a hopelessly backward, cruel, poverty-stricken wasteland. Among Kazakhstan’s favorite hobbies: “disco dancing, archery, rape, and table tennis.”

And yet Borat himself is endearing. He’s an enthusiastic, friendly guy. He comes by his prejudices innocently, with no hate or ill will behind them.

I saw the Borat film a couple weeks ago at a MySpace screening. They had them in 20 cities around the country on the same night, with invitations issued only through MySpace. You had to make the Borat movie page one of your “friends,” and then you were given instructions on how to attend. That’s why I felt comfortable posting the review so long before the film actually opens, which is usually a no-no: I found out about the screening, and got into the screening, not as a member of the press but as a MySpace user.

Being a MySpace-only event, everyone in the crowd was between the ages of 17 and about 30. At 32, I was literally one of the oldest people there. I’m certain there was no one over 40. The few people of that age group who do use MySpace probably were not interested in this film, I’m guessing. That, or they didn’t want to “out” themselves as creepy over-40 MySpace users. (You have my word that I will delete my account the day I turn 35.)

Subsequently, I got an invitation to the official press screening of the movie, and it was amusing, so I want to share it with you. Invitations to press screenings usually come by way of a letter that reads like this:

Monkeyshines Pictures cordially invites you to a screening of its forthcoming release:

“NINETY MINUTES OF COMPLETE CRAP”
(date)
(time)
(location)

(paragraph describing the film)

You must arrive at the theater at least 35 minutes prior to showtime to ensure seating. Note: This letter is non-transferrable.

There is very little variation in this format. However, the announcement I got for “Borat” was different. It’s made to look like it was printed with an ancient dot-matrix printer, and it reads as follows:

Kazakhstan Ministry of Information
Present You and Guest Invite to special screening of:

BORAT
Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan

Please you will come to this.

Thursday, 5 October
(time)
(location)

You must arrive at movie place thirty-five minutes early for seat. Invite present to you — no trade to others.

This is an example of how you can take something mundane and ordinary and do something fun with it every now and then. All the pertinent information is still conveyed. Plus, it’s actually FUNNY, and not just some corporate desk jockey’s idea of “funny.” We all have a chuckle, and no one gets hurt. Well, except the nation of Kazakhstan, whose leaders are apparently upset with Borat’s portrayal of their country. But whatever.