Thursday, June 09, 2005

Guest Blogger: Cedric the Entertainer

Note from Lons: Because he's doing me a huge favor and hosting the Braffy Awards, I thought I'd turn the blog over to Cedric the Entertainer this evening. He's got a new film coming out tomorrow, The Honeymooners, and I figured it would be nice for you, the Braffy voters, to meet the man who will be handing out the actual trophy itself. And who hopefully will be buying that trophy, because right now I have about $14 to my name, and it ain't for trophies.

So, may I present your guest blogger, Mr. Cedric the Entertainer.




Thanks, Lons.

How y'all doin'?

You all can do better than that. How y'all doin'?

Oh, wait, this is the Internet, so you can't hear me. In fact, I didn't even just say "How y'all doin'" out loud just now. I only typed it. So it was pretty silly of me to wait for a response.

Sorry. I think I'll start by telling you a bit about myself.

I was born in 1964 to Carl The Entertainer and Ruth Esther Goldenblatt. They named me Cedric after the old cartoon "Beanie and Cecil," having forgotten that kid was named Cecil and not Cedric. (That's also how rapper Beanie Siegel got his name...They really ought to put that cartoon back on TV to clear everything up).

I always knew I wanted to be a comic. I liked to make people laugh, and it took attention away from the fact that I was always wearing green suits and stupid hats. Plus, I figured good looking women might have sex wtih me.

When Spike Lee first asked me to star in the film Original Kings of Comedy, I asked if that wasn't a bit presumptuous of a title, considering that the vast majority of Americans had never heard of us, let alone heard and appreciated our comedy. Then DL Hughley said he didn't know what the word presumptuous means, and we all had a good laugh. Remembering that incident later, I realized that DL Hughley wasn't joking and genuinely didn't know what "presumptuous" meant. Nor did I, for that matter. But it was still really funny.

Now I know what you all must be thinking...The big movie star's only blogging on Crushed by Inertia because he's got a new movie to promote. Well, you couldn't be more wrong. I love white people's blogs, they so funny. They totally different from black people's blogs. Black people, they don't even have blogs, they all too poor to have computers! Ain't no computers in the ghetto. You want to play Minesweeper in my neighborhood, you better get your ass a broom. You know what I'm saying!

I'm just kidding, folks. You know me...I like to have fun with our differences. And that's why I wanted to talk to you all today.

Not to remind you that The Honeymooners opens tomorrow nationwide, and that I play the part of a cruel, self-aggrandizing wife-beater made famous by Jackie Gleason. I know you all already know that I'm starring in the film along side Mike Epps from the Friday movies...No, the two sequels, not the good one.

Yeah, that guy. He's been in some other good stuff too, man, he's a talented cat. Let me just pull him up on that IMDB site...

He's gonna be in Roll Bounce, the new hip-hop remake of 80's rollerskate dancing epic Roller Boogie. So I know y'all looking forward to catching him in that. [Note from Lons: Cedric's not kidding...They're really making a new version of Roller Boogie called Roll Bounce. I've read the script! Bow Wow is going to star!]

He had that cameo in Malbiu's Most Wanted, man, so you know, this guy is for real. He's playing Ed Norton, the name of that dude from Fight Club. Mike auditioned for Fight Club, but they ended up giving his part to Meat Loaf, on account of Meat Loaf had bigger titties to begin with. Which enhanced the realism.

Anyway, the buzz on the movie has aight, you know, just aight. I'm not gonna lie to you folks. Cory at Random Acts of Violence posted some really ugly reviews, like this one [Cedric hasn't yet mastered hypertext...here's the real Random Acts of Violence link...]:

David Hiltdbrand of the Philadelphia Inquirer gushes, "Not only an insult to the original, it should be shown at film schools as proof of how pointless a movie can be!"

David Hiltdbrand apparently never learned to hate the game and not the player. I ever see him around, my foot is gonna be an insult to his ass, if you know what I mean.

So I went over to Rotten Tomatoes, and the rating is 21% positive. Which sounds bad, but probably isn't that bad. I mean, come on, a kid gets a 21% on a test, you gonna give him an F? That's at least a C, right?

Anyway, here were some of the nicer comments. (I'm not gonna post the mean ones, cause Steve Harvey's just gonna call and read them all too me laughing anyway).

William Arnold at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer said:

"It's not a complete travesty. At the same time, it's nothing at all special."

So there you go right there. It ain't no travesty.

Chris Hewitt of the St. Paul Pioneer-Press said:

"The script is no better than it has to be, and the movie doesn't stretch anyone's talents, but it's as efficiently entertaining as a classic record by the Spinners."

Chris Hewitt. There you go. A man who appreciates good comedy.

Here's Sarah Chauncey of REEL.com:

"Unless you’re related to one of the actors, there is absolutely no reason to see The Honeymooners."

Now, that sounds like a bad review, but Sarah may have found out about the many many hundreds of illegitmite children Mike and I have sired all around this great country of ours. So, she probably means that a good cross-section of Americans who could theoretically be linked by DNA paternity testing to the actors will enjoy our movie.

Anyway, folks, I'm not gonna take up any more of your time. I'll see you at the Braffies!

Love,
C the E

2 comments:

berns said...

Ralph Kramden was not cruel, not was he a wife-beater. Let's not alter history just for our own needs.

Lons said...

Oh, lighten up, berns.

Or one of these days...BANG, ZOOM, to the moon!