Article critiquing film as pointless has no point.

Were you one of the 3.8 million people who went to see "The Breakup" this weekend? Me neither. But I did read a review of it today. Shockingly, the reviewer found it to be "wan" and "predictable." Frankly, I'm gobsmacked. A comedy about dating, starring Jennifer Aniston and Vince Vaugh, predictable? Who'd have thunk it?

I wonder, was the movie as predictable as the inevitable reviews calling it predictable? Predictably, the review focuses primarily on Aniston's looks, which as we all know is the best indicator of an actor's talent. Apparently, Aniston's straightening iron has finally weighed in against her. According to the review, not only is her acting one-dimensional, but her hair's too darn perfect, and her rack is too nice. For the reviewer, these factors like totally detracted from the film's deep philosophical core.

The review then goes on to explore the possibility that all of the media hype around Aniston's personal life may have had an impact on her performance in this great art piece. Did her real breakup with Pitt stifle the fire of her thespian greatness? Was Aniston, god-like in her control over public opinion, secretly manipulating the public's sympathy to draw people to the box office? Was this reviewer using the same hype to get away with a lame, flailing attempt to generate controversy over a movie nobody expected to be good? Oh wait, she didn't explore that last one...

In the end, all is made clear. Aniston is a good/crappy actor. The public loves/hates her. She is/isn't washed up. She makes strategic/shitty career decisions. And most importantly, her hair looks better straight/curly.

The movie was/wasn't shite. So think about/don't even consider going. I think I'll definitely/not go tonight/watch paint dry.