Hooligans Sportsbook

Movies and TV

  • Start date •
  • Replies
    13,837 Replies •
  • Views 1,009,467 Views
Follow
Haven't seen it. I probably won't any time soon. It would be down my list. Based on what I have heard, I am dubious. Critics keep describing it as ambitious but I don't hear anyone saying that the ambitions were realized.

Usually when I see reviews like it is getting, it means a certain kind of movie. Overblown pretentious artsy stuff that will mainly appeal to critics that want to pat themselves on the back for saying they like it.

However I don't know that for a fact in this case. Just trying to piece together the clues. I'm waiting to hear a reaction from an actual person.
 
Matty
Most critics are idiots. In Ebert I trust (even though he gave 4 stars to Synecdoche, New York, which is exactly the kind of overblown pretentious artsy stuff that I would expect someone like Ebert to call out.)
Click to expand...

Ugh. Remember when everyone else here loved that movie (Synecdoche, New York)?

I'd put it right up there with Tree of Life.
 
There are a few movie critics I like and can relate to on some level, enough to make use of their reviews. Michael Phillips, A.O. Scott, Richard Roeper and Ben Mankiewicz are all guys that are on a close enough wavelength to me to be useful. If they get bonered up over the occasional bit of pretentious crap, I can usually read between the lines and let it pass.


Ebert I have no use for at all.
 
Mudcat
There are a few movie critics I like and can relate to on some level, enough to make use of their reviews. Michael Phillips, A.O. Scott, Richard Roeper and Ben Mankiewicz are all guys that are on a close enough wavelength to me to be useful. If they get bonered up over the occasional bit of pretentious crap, I can usually read between the lines and let it pass.


Ebert I have no use for at all.
Click to expand...

I've read you say that before and it's completely baffling to me, like you're mistaking him for someone else (or you're referring to his dumbed-down TV reviews of old. He was forced to provide non-reviews to the unwashed masses back then.)

Roeper's kind of a talentless airhead, to put it in polite terms.

Muddy I'm afraid we're gonna need to take this outside pal.

vintage-boxers.gif
 
Re Roger Ebert:

There's nothing to really discuss. With critics, it's personal to each follower. In my experience, I can't trust Ebert and I can't fade him. He is all over the place to my taste. That's just the way it is and no amount of debate can change that.

If Ebert is your man, then I hope you enjoyed Garfield II: A Tale of Two Kitties.


:punches:
 
Yeah, I got nothing here. He even wrote the review from Garfield's perspective. :wah:

His Deuce Bigalow - European Gigolo review makes up for it:

The movie created a spot of controversy last February. According to a story by Larry Carroll of MTV News, Rob Schneider took offense when Patrick Goldstein of the Los Angeles Times listed this year's Best Picture Nominees and wrote that they were "ignored, unloved and turned down flat by most of the same studios that ... bankroll hundreds of sequels, including a follow-up to 'Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo,' a film that was sadly overlooked at Oscar time because apparently nobody had the foresight to invent a category for Best Running Penis Joke Delivered by a Third-Rate Comic."

Schneider retaliated by attacking Goldstein in full-page ads in Daily Variety and the Hollywood Reporter. In an open letter to Goldstein, Schneider wrote: "Well, Mr. Goldstein, I decided to do some research to find out what awards you have won. I went online and found that you have won nothing. Absolutely nothing. No journalistic awards of any kind ... Maybe you didn't win a Pulitzer Prize because they haven't invented a category for Best Third-Rate, Unfunny Pompous Reporter Who's Never Been Acknowledged by His Peers."

Reading this, I was about to observe that Schneider can dish it out but he can't take it. Then I found he's not so good at dishing it out, either. I went online and found that Patrick Goldstein has won a National Headliner Award, a Los Angeles Press Club Award, a RockCritics.com award, and the Publicists' Guild award for lifetime achievement.

Schneider was nominated for a 2000 Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actor, but lost to Jar-Jar Binks.

But Schneider is correct, and Patrick Goldstein has not yet won a Pulitzer Prize. Therefore, Goldstein is not qualified to complain that Columbia financed "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo" while passing on the opportunity to participate in "Million Dollar Baby," "Ray," "The Aviator," "Sideways" and "Finding Neverland." As chance would have it, I have won the Pulitzer Prize, and so I am qualified. Speaking in my official capacity as a Pulitzer Prize winner, Mr. Schneider, your movie sucks.


Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
 
You must log in or register to reply here.