Dreck

Rating: 1/10 (31 March 2012)

Does everybody know what the Yiddish work "dreck" means? Maybe it's spelled "drek". We see it here often in these reviews. It's the stuff that comes out of the south end of a horse going north. It's stuff that's most often flushed away. This movie is dreck. It should be flushed away. Yet another case of a director taking a great work by a great author and thinking s(he) is even greater, so the work has to be distorted somehow, so the director's ego's stamp is on it, so everyone will say "this director is a genius in his own right. (NOT). I guess it's tough to be a mediocre director faced with putting on a work of greatness. Where is the director's input? Sorta like opera, where they intentionally sing out of tune and harshly, and those egoists call that art. Opera has been around for hundreds of years, yet this horrible rendering of it is only 50 years or so old. Movies have been around less time, but they're already mucking it up so they can say, "look at me, I can f*ck it up, and I did, so go blow", like children in a playground. It's really amazing how many shills the producer got to vote high ratings and give good reviews. Actually, I have to commend the producer and director for the con they perpetrated. Obviously, they put in the least amount of cost and work, and they got mega-millions back for their paltry effort. The bottom line, thats the reality of our world. I'm sure one could write a high school English essay about the role of "bottom line" in the "Hunger Games" book. That might have more value then this movie dreck. Remember what that means?