Can you spot the one inexcusable item in this paragraph?

For real:

…Yup, it’s the use of ‘erie’ instead of ‘eerie.’ EVERYTHING ELSE can be justified in terms of the need to support the thesis, which is both clearly recognizable (“this movie was the best movie ever”) and well-supported by relevant examples. Also: I didn’t have to see the name “Face/Off” to recognize the movie, which means that the kid who wrote it passed a basic test when it comes to clarity and expression. Even the colloquial speech tics can be hand-waved.

But ‘erie’ isn’t even a word.  ‘Erie‘ is, which means that the kid doesn’t even have the excuse of spell-check to fall back on.  The jagged red lines would still have been there.

Moe Lane

PS: As many people have also noted: the kid’s got a point on how good Face/Off is.

5 thoughts on “Can you spot the one inexcusable item in this paragraph?”

  1. This one’s squarely in Bob Heinlien’s “buy the premise, buy the bit” category.
    .
    I didn’t.
    .
    I didn’t hate it like Stross’ Accelerando. (Hey, I have an autistic child. Use processing power as a stand in for intelligence, and I’m going to get cranky.)

  2. I guessed right. Although I disagree about the quality of “Face/Off”. I think it’s a silly film. I actually get the feeling that the writer was making fun of the movie with excessive praise.

  3. I was gonna say “any mention of Nic Cage,” though I hear FaceOff is one of his better works. Not to be a complete hypocrite though, I found National Treasure surprisingly enjoyable.

  4. Face/Off started out promising interestng psychological twists, but then turned into a by the numbers shoot-’em-up. And John Woo and the laws of physics do not intersect.
    .
    On the uo side, I’m off to the Oregon Coast for a weekend of camping with my pards. Catch you Monday.

Comments are closed.