Miss March (2009)
Miss March was poorly received by nearly all critics. Rotten Tomatoes reported that only 5% of reviewers gave the film positive reviews, based upon a sample of 81 reviews, which gave an average score of 2.90 out of 10. Its consensus states, "Even by the modest standards of the teen sex comedy genre, the crass, poorly-made Miss March misses the mark."On Metacritic, the film received a weighted average average score of 7 out of 100 based upon 15 reviews, indicating "overwhelming dislike".
Miss March (2009)
Copyright 2023 Salon.com, LLC. Reproduction of material from any Salon pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. SALON is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office as a trademark of Salon.com, LLC. Associated Press articles: Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Copyright 2023 Santa Barbara Independent, Inc. Reproduction of material from any Independent.com pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. If you believe an Independent.com user or any material appearing on Independent.com is copyrighted material used without proper permission, please click here. Site by Trew Knowledge.Powered by WordPress VIP.
Dude, seriously?I haven't seen this movie yet, but the second you dissed Broken Lizard, the rest of your review was null and void. I never watch Whitest Kids U Know, so I don't know anything about THESE guys, but to slam the makers of one of the funniest films to come out in the past decade (I speak of "Super Troopers") made me WANT to see "Miss March". Just to make sure I'm not missing out.
In order to better understand dust source regions and production, Grini et al. (2005) introduced two new erodibility factors to simulate dust production and compared them with two earlier erodibility factors obtained by different methods [the method of Ginoux et al. (2001) and the method of Zender et al. (2003)]. They found that all four methods agreed on high erodibility in southern Saudi Arabia, while the new erodibility factors demonstrated high erodibility in northern Saudi Arabia as well. The erodibility factors obtained by the method of Ginoux et al. (2001) and the method of Zender et al. (2003) predicted higher emissions in eastern Saudi Arabia, near the Arabian Gulf and in southern Iraq, consistent with TOMS. However, determining the exact source regions from TOMS was difficult since advection distributes the dust throughout this area.
The dust storm of 10 and 11 March 2009 was one of the most severe dust storms to be recorded on the Arabian Peninsula due to both the large scale and severity of the event. The gigantic dust plume, originating on 10 March 2009, impacted several cities in the northeastern, eastern, and central parts of Saudi Arabia and most of Kuwait, covering a distance of about 1,500 km and an area of approximately 300,000 km2. However, no media statement had been released prior to the event reaching Riyadh, alarming and recommending precautions for sensitive populations. Consequently, this dust storm, which left thousands of people choking on heavily dust-polluted air, is associated with an enormous increase in respiratory hospital admissions in the city of Riyadh. In addition, the associated low visibility resulted in many group car accidents in several parts of the city. During the event, hourly visibility of 50 m was reported in Riyadh and Qaisummah, whereas hourly visibility of 100 m was reported in Hafr Al-Batin and Dhahran. 041b061a72