Roger Ebert thread

Roger Ebert and Pauline Kael were two peas in a pod. They suffered from irony poisoning before that was a thing and took up whatever viewpoint that would run counter to what flyover country would like. Most of the time it seemed like the only reason why they said anything was to hear themselves talk. Sometimes that lead to shit that aged very poorly. Unfortunately his final years consisted of him just being yet another libtard and even the occasional amount of wit he expressed gave way to just being another wokescold before that was a thing.

tl;dr Roger Ebert is a big ol’ fag
 
  • Like
  • Late
Reactions: Seafarer, Mexican_Wizard_711, The Token Ethnic and 8 others
mlanguishi said:
I'm glad for this thread. While Ebert was often a goofy sperg, he was really a good writer. Even if you didn't agree with his opinion, they were usually well written and easy to follow. He had a great style.

If you go to his zero-star reviews, there are a lot of gems. Wolf Creek is a good one. He basically treats it as crime against humanity. Mad Dog Time and North are also classics. She's out of Control too. If you look at this list he did in 2005, you'll see that almost all of them are truly some of the worst movies of their times.

Click to expand...
1690630856940.png
Fuck off Ebert.

1690630987543.png
He must've been REAL fun at parties...

1690631127862.png
I don't even have words for this. We're "maybe" ashamed of it? Feels skeevy AF.

1690631256848.png
Sarcastic yes, but his last sentence isn't helping with the noncery (especially given that "The Blue Lagoon" review)

TLDR: not only was Ebert a "fucking faggot" but he might've been a nonce.
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Da Capo, Mexican_Wizard_711, ChampFantana and 5 others
naaaaiiiiillllll!!! said:
View attachment 5240597
Fuck off Ebert.

View attachment 5240602
He must've been REAL fun at parties...

View attachment 5240603
I don't even have words for this. We're "maybe" ashamed of it? Feels skeevy AF.

View attachment 5240607
Sarcastic yes, but his last sentence isn't helping with the noncery (especially given that "The Blue Lagoon" review)

TLDR: not only was Ebert a "fucking faggot" but he might've been a nonce.
Click to expand...
To be fair, both S&E trashed the Blue Lagoon remake


Original one:


In the original especially they both trash the marketing of the pedo style marketing.
 
naaaaiiiiillllll!!! said:
View attachment 5240597
Fuck off Ebert.

View attachment 5240602
He must've been REAL fun at parties...

View attachment 5240603
I don't even have words for this. We're "maybe" ashamed of it? Feels skeevy AF.

View attachment 5240607
Sarcastic yes, but his last sentence isn't helping with the noncery (especially given that "The Blue Lagoon" review)

TLDR: not only was Ebert a "fucking faggot" but he might've been a nonce.
Click to expand...
That take on Armageddon was so popular with I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE types, especially their early archetype, Phil Plait. They loved Deep Impact in turn because muh blak president and how Robert Duvall's character was based on Story Musgrave, and how it was all 'much more realistic' despite the 'science' of both being kinda crazytown.

And Armageddon did better specifically because it was utterly retarded. Retarded is fun sometimes.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Mexican_Wizard_711, ChampFantana, Xenomorphs Are Cute and 5 others
Mikoyan said:
And Armageddon did better specifically because it was utterly retarded. Retarded is fun sometimes.
Click to expand...
As with many other Michael Bay movies. Nobody is expecting deep high art from the guy. People come to see Bay's movies because, like what you said, they're retarded but in a good fun sorta way. This explains why people shat on Bayformers because muh Michael Bay, and this is coming from myself who used be a total sperglord shitting on Bay's movies (and I'm not saying I'm no longer a sperg, I am still am). And people who simp on whatever journos and critics say about Michael Bay are full of shit.
 
  • Agree
  • Disagree
Reactions: Mexican_Wizard_711, ChampFantana, Sphere and 1 other person
Whenever someone says "That's not realistic" or whatever

It's entertainment. Complaining about realism in entertainment, especially entertainment that isn't going for realism in any way, is for retards who desperatley want to be viewed as intelligent.

Going "hehe, that's goofy" is fine. Saying "this sucks cause that couldn't happen." is fucking gay.
 
  • Dumb
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: TVB, ChampFantana and Sphere
Sphere said:
There are talented filmmakers in Bollywood?
Click to expand...
I don't even want to try to defend Bollywood, the few good things that have come out of it are only mediocre at best but don't be surprise when Hollywood makes no money for their sinking ship with WOKENESS and turn to Bollywood as a guiding light. DRINK!
TVBForever said:
No. No there are not
Click to expand...
Be like Homer and try to find the good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lowlife Adventures and Seafarer
Mikoyan said:
That take on Armageddon was so popular with I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE types, especially their early archetype, Phil Plait. They loved Deep Impact in turn because muh blak president and how Robert Duvall's character was based on Story Musgrave, and how it was all 'much more realistic' despite the 'science' of both being kinda crazytown.

And Armageddon did better specifically because it was utterly retarded. Retarded is fun sometimes.
Click to expand...
Hell yeah it is. Drive Angry is a deeply retarded movie, but damned if it isn't a shitload of fun from start to finish and one of my favorite Nic Cage flicks.

Also, Pauline Kael was a stupid, inbred cunt who spent her review of Dirty Harry whining about "fascism." Im not surprised that genuine cretins like Tarantino and Ebert loved her.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Xenomorphs Are Cute, The Token Ethnic and TVB
TVBForever said:
Believe me, you are not. I cannot stand Pauline Kael. She's a fucking bitch twat who predates an average goyslop breadtuber, and this is not a good thing
Click to expand...
Kael was an old school liberal, from even before Ebert. She was dry and humorless and early feminist. There was still a bit of 'alright, that helps' to her reviews. Maltin, Ebert, and Siskel led the way to the easily identifiable review era. The old dry way left.

Now you have people like Chris Stuckmann that refused to review bad movies or give negative reviews because he wants his own shit movie to not get trashed. For a long time we've had the 'Youtube Critic' era where they want to make the movies themselves and think themselves as educated and filmmakers, but they're lolcows. That's current reviewing.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Coo Coo Bird, Xenomorphs Are Cute, Seafarer and 1 other person
mlanguishi said:
Now you have people like Chris Stuckmann that refused to review bad movies or give negative reviews because he wants his own shit movie to not get trashed. For a long time we've had the 'Youtube Critic' era where they want to make the movies themselves and think themselves as educated and filmmakers, but they're lolcows. That's current reviewing.
Click to expand...
Chris Stuckmann has a very punchable face. He's one of the many prime consoomers that are too pussy to even be a minority of opinion so he instead makes it easy on himself and his shitty viewers to agree with the popular consensus.

He also is butthurt towards RedLetterMedia because they made some joke on him, so he made some autistic meltdown ranting about the crew. I swear I wish there was a lolcow thread on that fucker
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: The Token Ethnic, Mexican_Wizard_711, Xenomorphs Are Cute and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back