Roger Ebert's review of BLU

<snip> What is it saying? That movies have gone too far, or that protests against movies have gone too far? It is a sign of our times that I cannot tell. <snip>

Says it all, doesn't it? What confuses Mr Ebert is what I enjoy most about SP.

Well,,as SP titled one ep: "Roger Ebert needs to lay off the fattty foods"

If I was a betting man, I would have put my money on the fat one to choke first, not the other way around...

Siskel croaked from a brain tumor. Probably induced from having to listen to a fattass ego tard like Ebert badmouth good shows and go into his "If *I* had been directing this movie, I would've done it THIS way....." shit week after week after horrifying week.

furplay wrote...

While it's sad that Siskel died so young, I don't think he was a much better critic than Ebert (although I only watched their show sporadically). Did you see S&E's review of Jurassic Park? If I remember correctly, they both disliked the horror and suspense elements and agreed that the film needed "more scenes of awe." (Maybe it was just one of them who expressed this. Like I said, 'if I remember correctly.')

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

Eric Perlin wrote in message ...

So it was Siskel and Ebert from whence the phrase "Two thumbs down" came.

- -- Stephen Hopkins PGP key ID 0xE24AA972 on public key-server or e-mail me. "It's the alien anal probe! It's shooting fire from Cartman's rectum!" SP#101

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.0.2i

iQA/AwUBN5ClnBg6aTziSqlyEQL+8ACg4BTC5ivKi8ZljaKSGU6rhW70dm4AoLjE kSpELPUlijQLqJuqD4nKErsu =AaO0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Ebert gave 3 stars to Godfather 3. I think that pretty much sums everything up.

Pupkin 81 wrote:

What's wrong with G3? The other 2 were Oscar winners, fer chrissakes.

G

I'll TELL you what's wrong with Godfather 3: the same thing that's wrong with _all_ the Godfather movies. They're just so negative and mean-spirited. They don't raise any issues; they just throw them out there. The Godfather films lower the bar.

(For those who missed it, I'm paraphrasing the simple-minded bull-poo Ebert said about South Park: BL&U.)

Very wise to include a disclaimer. Without it, you would have been vaporized by thousands of Coppola lover killfiles. It sure is a dark, dark time for the rebellion.

I've watched Siskel & Ebert for like 20+ years since they first came on TV, and Ebert has always struck me as a stupid dude who has too much fat on him and too much of a boozhie, while Siskel always seemd kind of drunk. If I had to argue with that idiot Ebert I'd be drunk too.

But the absolutley most idiotic asshole reviewer has got to be Michael Medved. When he was on with Horowitz (who's pretty fucking stupid himself), Horowitz practically jumped over and ate him for lnch.

Part 1 and especially part 2 are great but 3 was a complete waste of everyones time. They should have gone with Wynona Rider and her ping pong pussy instead of Sofia Coppola because she made a bad movie even worse.

The saddest thing of all, is this must be coming from his own ineffeciency. I am not sure if any of you have seen any of Roger Ebert's movies, but he wrote three of them.

Beyond the Valley of the Dolls Up! Beneath the Valley of the Ultra-vixens

They are bad. I don't understand how the man who wrote this drivel can be called a critic or how he has the audacity to give a bad rating to a movie, he should watch some of his own movies. I wonder what he would give it as a critique. It would surely knock him off his high horse.

LJ

LooseChanj wrote:

Really? I would have never guessed that from their titles...

I don't understand how the man who wrote this drivel can be