About Me

Kyle Smith (Twitter: @rkylesmith) is critic-at-large for National Review, theater critic for The New Criterion and the author of the novels Love Monkey and A Christmas Caroline. Type a title in the box above to locate a review.

Buy Love Monkey for $4! "Hilarious"--Maslin, NY Times. "Exceedingly readable and wickedly funny romantic comedy"--S.F. Chronicle. "Loud and brash, a helluva lot of fun"--Entertainment Weekly. "Engaging romp, laugh-out-loud funny"-CNN. "Shrewd, self-deprecating, oh-so-witty. Smith's ruthless humor knows no bounds"--NPR

Buy A Christmas Caroline for $10! "for those who prefer their sentimentality seasoned with a dash of cynical wit. A quick, enjoyable read...straight out of Devil Wears Prada"--The Wall Street Journal

Rotten Tomatoes
Search Movie/Celeb

Advanced Search
  • Recent Comments

  • Categories

  • « | Home | »

    Sunday Column Preview

    By kyle | March 6, 2009

    In my Sunday column I’ll have more to say about the politics of “Watchmen” and why conservatives can find much to delight us there (despite author Alan Moore’s anarchism. He has in public disdained both sides but especially the right; I think “Watchmen,” unlike “V for Vendetta,” is harsher on the left). In the meantime, kindly check out my Jedi master Todd Seavey’s interesting review on Todd thinks the movie is a perfect adaptation of the comic book, of which he is an extravagant admirer, and writes his review in Dr. Manhattan tones. Another conservative, my erstwhile editor at, Peter Suderman, has a different point of view, arguing that what works on Moore’s pages doesn’t translate to the screen. He calls the movie too literal, “stilted and lifeless.”

    Topics: Comic Books, Movies, New York City, Philosophy, Politics | 12 Comments »

    12 Responses to “Sunday Column Preview”

    1. Patrick. Says:
      March 6th, 2009 at 8:54 pm

      Do your columns ever NOT strain to align your political views with a movie you enjoy anymore?

    2. kyle Says:
      March 6th, 2009 at 9:27 pm

      Hmm…let me think about that….yes.

    3. Patrick. Says:
      March 7th, 2009 at 12:15 am

      It does not necessarily have to be a studio flick (see: Lost, Taking Chance). It’s a shame you devote writing talent to obvious attempts to blow partisan dust on mere entertainment.

      The true political allegories of film history endure, but you are chasing trivial subjects. No one is going to be discussing the undertones of Watchmen a decade from now (if they were to even initiate such a conversation, it would be in regard to the 1986 graphic novel and not the Hollywood adaptation, anyway). Brace yourself for the explosion of criticism you will receive at the Post for forming analytic conclusions without any long-term grasping of the source material.

    4. John Says:
      March 7th, 2009 at 12:41 am

      I didn’t like it. Plus I got tired of seeing Dr Manhattan’s blue schlong.

    5. kyle Says:
      March 7th, 2009 at 3:19 pm

      @P, I am braced. I do hope I survive this terrifying onslaught you foresee.

    6. duder Says:
      March 7th, 2009 at 5:11 pm

      Watchmen is pro-conservative? LOL? Where?

      Oh wait, Rorschach has a line vilifying “liberals and intellectuals” but then meets the force of Dr. Manhattan because in order for peace to exist we need to get rid of right wing reactionaries. I think that’s what scared Debbie Schlussel most; she is an endangered species in a post Bush, post conservative world.

    7. Patrick. Says:
      March 7th, 2009 at 8:57 pm

      Let’s hope for the best.

    8. Hunter Tremayne Says:
      March 7th, 2009 at 11:36 pm

      When the going gets tough, Kyle dons his puffy pirate shirt!

    9. Jules Says:
      March 8th, 2009 at 11:45 am

      Watchmen has become Kyle’s new Palin. Nwes flash – no one gives a s–t about this film.

    10. Jules Says:
      March 8th, 2009 at 11:45 am

      Nwes = news

    11. Jim Treacher Says:
      March 9th, 2009 at 8:36 pm

      S-t = darn

    12. John Says:
      March 10th, 2009 at 7:11 pm

      I have to agree with Jules.