At this point, what should happen is for you to write a couple paragraphs. Paragraphs of what? Ok, you watch a movie like "Flyboys" and halfway through you wonder if perhaps passing out after a couple six-packs might be more life-enhancing. You guts it through, stifling yawns as you wait for what is formally known as character development; that is, the caring whether any of these young lads live through the war. Then, after nearly two hours, the credits appear on the screen backed by patriotic muzak. God-awful stuff, you think. You need to tell someone but you're alone in your self-imposed ennui. What to do, what to do?

One satisfyng alternative is to redirect your thoughts into words, here, at the Inlet. But, what words? Aarrrghhhhhh!!! Or, holy caca, that was awful! Or ... give this mess one star. Temporarily satisfying but not very productive, and you'll be sorry later as waves of regret at not doing more to make the world a better place, to save the uninitiated from the same Blockbuster Video rental fee you wasted.

So, what do you have to work with? You know the story (loose term here but you get the idea). First critique plot point: How could the movie have been better (or been anything in this case)? Look at the flat cast, the Lassie-Come-Home music, its predictability. Start by briefly explaining the story to those fortunates who weren't as dumb as you for watching it (yes, some catharsis here). This is a good place to drip bites of sarcasm which surely you are figuratively chewing. Go into a couple story lines as examples. The tricky part here is to avoid "spoilers," giving away too much which would decrease the mystery of coming events. In the case of "Flyboys," you might stop with "and they were WWI flyers ... " because that pretty much gives away the whole shebang. But, assuming you're commenting on a movie with a mind behind it, be cautious about substituting storyline for criticism. Oh, by the way, it's worth mentioning that a critique involves the good with the bad. Discussing the intricasies of "3:10 to Yuma's" clever plot becomes no less important than pointing out the immoral laziness of the huckter's who rented some biplanes and figured they could pass this off as entertainment. Just remember not to tell the story. You're shooting for insight, not revelation.

The best, and maybe the easiest, way to place a movie in its critical hierarchy is by simply comparing elements of story or acting or the tightness of its script to other films, those in approximately the same genre. "Flyboys" with "Twelve O'Clock High," a Steven Segal butt-kicker with a James Bond, "Saving Grace" with "Mrs Henderson Presents."

Also, get into the critical habit while you're watching a movie; the seeds of insight begin there. During nearly every movie I view, other related stories float through my mind. The music, the interaction of characters, my interest level, all these become part of my opinion, whether I write it out afterwards or discuss it with a fellow admirer, or victim. You don't need to take notes, but you do need to be know whether you're watching an honest attempt at emotional/intellectual communication or just sitting through another money-making exercise in Hollywood marketing. Happy writing.