![]() |
|
|
#16 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
More ratings from Ebert.
Roger Ebert gave both The Hitcher and Doom Generation 0 stars! That's zero out of a possible four. The Hitcher 0 stars? And yes the film is reviewed. Check out his ratings for John Carpenter: Big Trouble in little China (2 stars) J.C. Vampires (2 stars) Prince of Darkness (2 stars) Escape from L.A. (3 1/2 stars)! Three and a half stars for EFLA? Other ratings: Hellraiser (1 star) Hellbound Hellraiser2 (1 1/2 stars) Night of the Living Dead Remake ( 1 star) Resevoir Dogs (2 1/2 stars) This one's funny. Dick Tracy (4 STARS)! You can read the reviews and search for films at www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebertser.html |
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Johnny Hallyday forever
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hell-as
Posts: 4,257
|
Guys, what you are doing is silly.
So what if that's what he thinks? I don't get it. What it matters to you? Hey, I too would rate Dick Tracy with four stars and Doom Generation with 0. What does that make me?
__________________
"Only on Horrordvds.com could a well intentioned get well thread turn into an infomercial about the propensity for testicular perspiration". There Is No Freedom, Wake Up. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I really don't care what Ebert thinks
. I only posted this because I think it's fun to pick on Ebert because he's such a respected critic that in my opinion needs to be knocked off his high horse from time to time. It's like Trey Parker and Matt Stone bitching about Barbera Streisand. I'm only having fun. One thing that I like to say about Ebert is that he likes foreign subtitled films so much, because he doesn't have to stop stuffing his face to hear the dialog. That's the real reason he hates dubbing. I really don't care what Ebert or any other critic thinks. But I would like to get an idea about the movie I'm going to watch and I don't think Ebert truely apprecieates low budget films. Reasoning for this: 1. He complained about Troma not giving Stendhal Syndrome a wide theatrical release, yet he didn't go see Tromeo and Juilet or Terror firmer, which had a decent size release. In fact, he was invited to see those films, but declined. 2. That he hates Death Race 2000 so much that he wouldn't mind if it was destroyed is another. Death Race 2000 isn't supposed to be a big picture. It was just another Roger Corman quicke. Only I think it's a really good movie considering the budget and what they were trying to accomplish. I agree Troma movies suck. But I don't think it was fair of Ebert to attack them the way he did. At least Troma offered Argento's film uncut, which is something a major studio would most likely not have done. Not to mention Troma is a very small company. The most any actor has made on a Troma film is $450 total. Maybe I'm just jealous of Ebert. He has a great job. But I definitely would not pick on small movies as much as he has done. |
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Ebert vs. Gore
I would also like to state that we really need some younger film reviewers out there. Ebert, Maltin, Schallit and all of these older critics represent my parents taste in movies more than mine.
The only critic that I really connect with is Chris Gore. I don't agree with him on everything, but I think he's more in touch with a film fan like myself. For one thing, Chris Gore likes horror movies. He also supports independent cinema and even release some independant films in the early 90's. I also thought he had a better review show than Eberts. The Chris Gore show was set up like politicaly incorrect. Four different people would give their view of the films, while Chris would introduce the film and close with his own opinion of the movie. He would also ask the panel what they liked and didn't like about the film. |
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: May 2000
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,534
|
Personally, I don't think Ebert's too far off base in that review, with perhaps the exception of his ignorance about Seven Doors of Death (He doesn't seem to realize it's an American re-edit, with Americanized names).
I've been going through a bit of a Fulci revival lately, watching some of his movies for a second time. Sorry, but The Beyond is still a little too dumb for me. City of the Living Dead is slower, but it's a much better film. I think any average reviewer would come up with the same opinions about The Beyond as Ebert did. Face it, if you're someone who "gets" Fulci, an Ebert review isn't going to make or break your decision to watch one of his films. Ebert wrote that review for everyone, and most everyone doesn't "get" Fulci either.
__________________
CINEMA PAFF - Your BB-Movie Showcase * * - The extra B is for BYOBB Paff's Laserdiscs |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Right on Paff...
Although I like The Beyond, I gotta go with Paff on this one. I sure don't like Fulci movies for their strong scripts (they rarely exist). I don't like to assume things while watching a movie, that's the filmmakers job, and with Fulci films you have to. Hell, you have to make up whole parts!!! A lot of the effects are horribly ridiculous, and the dialogue and drama are silly and over the top. But, the films are stylish and engrossing, none the less.
Ebert has a defferent taste, so what? I love the Doom Generation!!!!!!!!! So he can can eat poo about that. But hey, that's his OPINION. I know I have some opinions that a lot of people don't like. (I just don't get paid for it!!!!!) |
|
|
|
#22 | |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 2,403
|
Ebert is a large man. I don't think he gets laid often and I could care less if he likes the Beyond or not. I agree with Paff, you made some good points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
He's either a closet froggie or a reviewer with mainstream taste. You decide......
.
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Fuck it.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Dallas
Posts: 4,904
|
ribbit...
LOL!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#26 | |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|