February 28, 2011
Scares the hell out of movie viewers.
Scares the hell out of liberals.
I was browsing Netflix recently trying to track down a copy of the 1970s conspiracy-thriller-disguised-as-a-killer-fish-film “Barracuda” (Shut up, you! It was super kewl in the late 70s, especially with it’s freaky downbeat ending!).
I’d figured the film was pretty much gone for good and so was delighted to discover that it’s still available on one of those cheap compilation discs that sometimes pair up forgotten films under a kind of cheesy drive-in movie banner.
Here’s a sample from the text of the first customer review listed:
…You gotta love a flick that pretends to be about fish “gone bad” (ala Jaws) but is actually about a government experiment that has unintentional consequences for the local population and the local sea-life. The whole conspiracy concept is so laughable and the way it is portrayed will make you wonder if Sarah Palin helped write the script.. You know what I mean, “someone isn’t telling the whole truth” and so on hehe.
One scene shows a young lady who takes her shirt off and seduces one of the “visitors” and then cuts his “man-hood” off but we see no hide nor hair of her afterward or what happened to her. I can live with that though because the whole movie is so silly and plot holes are as prevalent as Sara Palin’s husband attempts to get that state trooper fired in Alaska. I meant that there are many plot holes in this flick. Just wanted to clarify that hehe. Recommended if you like double features that pretend they are 70′s flicks. 10/14
Get it? The movie is so bad that it’s like SARAH PALIN WAS INVOLVED!!!1!
The next time you feel bad about yourself, just remember that there are people out there who are so consumed with hatred for Sarah Palin that they can’t even write a customer review for a cheesy 70s movie without telling the whole world how much they hate the former governor of Alaska.
She lives inside their heads rent free.
January 10, 2011
Now don’t be put off by the length. I’ve cued the video up to the proper moment. You don’t have to watch all nine minutes, my ADD-addled minions.
As for the video itself, I’m not entirely clear what’s happening to him, but it sort of looks like he’s being turned inside out and then into pudding. Whatever it is, that’ll learn him.
Now if you didn’t enjoy that, then go ahead and watch a 67-year-old woman do a provocative dance. You’re welcome.
Read the rest of this entry »
September 19, 2007
What an amazing movie. I have to confess that, until now I’ve never really appreciated Orson Welles, at best sort of hypothetically understanding that he was supposed to be some sort of genius but never experiencing it first-hand. To me, he was always sort of a fat joke or a punchline, the Mephistopholean guy with the snooty baritone hawking Paul Masson wine. Later, he would be the weird pretentious guy having such a difficult time recording that peas commercial.
Read the rest of this entry »
September 17, 2007
In a recent Movie Answer Man column, Roger runs a letter from a reader asking whether there is a movie named Corpus Christi depicting Jesus Christ as a homosexual and remarking that, if such a film did exist, “it would be sad.”
It would be sad if it was a bad movie, not if it was a good one. A movie’s quality is separate from its subject.
I can’t wait to show Roger my next movie. It’s first rate: great script, great cast, great director, great cinematographer, great editor, etc. It’s about his mom, and it depicts her as a pedophile.
Can’t wait for his four-star review!
February 8, 2006
Roger’s recent series of Sundance essays is a pretty entertaining and informative read, overall, but includes a bizzarre critique of the Minute Men, citizens who patrol the Mexican border to identify people attempting illegal immigration into the United States.
Whilst reviewing the new film Man Push Cart about a former rock and roll star from Pakistan who operates a vending cart on the streets of Manhattan, Roger had this to say:
I wish “Man Push Cart” could be seen by the Minute Men, self-anointed patriots shown in the Sundance documentary “Crossing Arizona,” who man the Mexican border with night-vision binoculars and hope to repel illegal immigrants without whom Arizona’s agricultural economy would collapse. I wonder if the Minute Men see themselves as the children of immigrants. Can they see Ahmad as an American?
I like Roger Ebert very much, but he is no stranger to moonbattery, and it never fails to mystify. The ignorance he displays in this particular excerpt is mindboggling. He reflexively conflates opposition to illegal immigration with opposition to immigration, as though there is no difference between the two. He then seems to assume that no Minute Man is capable of appreciating that every American is, somewhere down the line, the child of an immigrant. Imagine that. He then compounds the insults by suggesting that the Minute Men are bigots incapable of seeing a Pakistani man as an American. How he justifies equating opposition to illegal immigration with general xenophobia is not clear, though to be fair it might have something to do with Crossing Arizona, a documentary that Roger wrote about earlier in the festival which apparently presents the Minute Men in an unflattering light, although I get the sense based on his writing that Roger didn’t take much convincing.
Note also the sneering reference to the Minute Men as “self-anointed patriots.” I’d be curious to know how Roger defines patriotism, and furthermore what he believes is wrong with “anointing” oneself as a patriot. It seems to me that taking legal action to reinforce the security of your country is a legitimate form of patriotism, but the left often seems to sneer at this. To rely upon them, you’d think that real patriotism is defined by how aggressively one hates President Bush or sides against the United States in the world arena.
Roger Ebert’s reviews were must-reads when I was a boy. I fantasized about being a film critic, and Roger and Gene Siskel were so influential to me that I kept a scrapbook of their writings from 1980-1982. I still think he’s an excellent writer, but his politics stink.