I don't see it here, but Den of Geeks posted a really great interview with Joss.

lurkolog | June 07, 06:39 CET

Wired's review from Jason Michelitch is not flattering. "It may seem churlish to react so poorly to what is essentially a quickly-made romp with friends, but there is something just so profoundly disappointing about the entire enterprise."

counti8 | June 07, 06:44 CET

It's good to see so much praise in so many reviews. It seems to be playing well to a broad audience of critics. Although unfortunately not everyone has been so complimentary.

Derf | June 07, 06:44 CET

MSN Movies : http://movies.msn.com/movies/movie-critic-reviews/much-ado-about-nothing.7/

DaddyCatALSO | June 07, 06:57 CET

I saw that Wired review too. The writer makes that old complaint about Joss that he is more of a writer and is not a visually interesting director. However a few other reviews have complimented the films visual style. I haven't seen Much Ado myself but I've never found Joss to be lacking a cinematic shooting style.

Derf | June 07, 07:09 CET

Wow, so Joss could have written a draft for Avatar. I wonder how different the eventual film would be had that happened. Less Pocahontas and more Mulan perhaps?

Kaan | June 07, 07:15 CET

Joss Whedon’s Much Ado About Nothing Isn’t Much of Anything at All

http://www.wired.com/underwire/2013/06/much-ado-about-nothing-review/

Ouch. :(

Hjermsted | June 07, 08:32 CET

GQ have a great review.

The reviewer calls it "one of the sweetest and best movies ever made about Los Angeles".

Derf | June 07, 08:37 CET

http://www.assignmentx.com/2013/movie-review-much-ado-about-nothing/

And here's another review (I have never been able to make links work in the comments section, forgive me).

Shapenew | June 07, 11:07 CET

Most small independent film don't get this many reviewers at major news outlets to review them, so even the bad reviews are still pretty good free advertising. And I'm not going to worry about a few bad ones when 'Much Ado About Nothing' is at 82% fresh at Rottentomatoes (higher than any other film currently out in theaters). I'm really excited about this!

Of course it is only in a handful (literally) of theaters at the moment, but I'm hoping all this good press will help it get to more theaters in more state (like in Iowa! LOL).

embers | June 07, 11:52 CET

Just noting that the movie has secured a certified fresh rating on rotten tomatoes.

TenTonParasol | June 07, 14:05 CET

My local paper, the SF Chronicle had a glowing review of the movie - can't link bc it's behind a pay wall. The reviewer even went so far as to say he was so moved that he had tears in his eyes at least four times during the movie.

dottikin | June 07, 15:49 CET

Oh thank you dottkin! I had been so happy to see all the great reviews from LA and NYC, but disappointed that I wasn't reading any coming out of San Francisco. So I'm really happy to hear it got a great review in the Chronicle (I've asked my friends to go and tell me how they liked it, but the good review will reassure them it isn't just for me!).

embers | June 07, 18:55 CET

A reminder from last September, The Guardian's review.

This line from the Wired review is illuminating re: the reviewer: "[in] Whedon’s television work [...] the dialogue-driven plot development is king, clever twists and glib lines are hard currency, and anything resembling the poetry of cinema is generally absent."

While some of this is there, Joss' work doesn't have an ironic tone... I would say that character is primary over plot in his TV work and "poetry of television" is most certainly there, quite famously so in some cases... it seems (like so much Wired writing) the reviewer prefers to pronounce from an ironic, "please me" distance.

[ edited by dgscofield on 2013-06-08 10:16 ]

dgscofield | June 08, 01:14 CET

Man, what's with all the hatin' on the critic who didn't like it? Seems like any time a critic is less than enthused about a Joss project, the commenters* go on offense with ad hominem attacks against the critic. People have opinions and preferences. The guy who wrote that Wired review has his own. Not really sure that his review was so egregious that it merited people telling him that he's "pretentious," "never come close to ever actually having made a film," and "[w]ould that you had begun your article with an outline, and/or asked someone to edit it."

It's one thing to disagree with a critic's opinion of the film, but going into attack mode against anyone who expresses a less-than-adulatory opinion does seem a bit Belieber-esque.

*Talking about the Wired commenters and those on a few other reviews I've seen.

BrewBunny | June 08, 10:10 CET

Let's not get into what commenters on others sites are saying, please.

Sunfire | June 08, 11:14 CET

I've never cared what critics think, either way... why is their opinion on these things so important to me? Is it really that important that some other random people like what I like? I enjoy what I enjoy, regardless of critics. Joss has generally made things that I enjoy :) Can't wait to see it.

nulli_secundus | June 09, 04:58 CET