|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big pile of Roger Ebert snark [message #170237 is a reply to message #170236] |
Tue, 23 December 2008 04:24   |
|
|
Originally posted by: dgates
On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:06:18 GMT, Derek Janssen
<ejanss1@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
> Fish Eye no Miko wrote:
>
>> nebu...@-rpi-.edu (Joseph Nebus) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Really, who doesn't just love a nice pile of sentences about
>>> just how awful the bad movies are?
>>>
>>> http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/in_the_meadow_we_can _review_a...
>>
>>
>> Nice!
>>
>> Catherine Johnson, proud owner of _Your Movie Sucks_, a whole book of
>> Ebert's bad reviews.
>
> Any vintage reviews in YMS, seeing as "I Hated, Hated, HATED This Movie"
> was the *first* classic Ebert-Pan[tm] compendium, and goes all the way
> back to "Airport '79: the Concorde" and early-70's grindhouse?
Nope! Early 2000s only.
I really enjoyed Hated Hated HATED, but YMS bored me silly!
"Hated" had years of classic reviews -- I'll flip to five random pages
and see what I get...
At the Earth's Core (1976)
Color of Night (1994)
Fathers Day (1997)
Jennifer 8 (1992)
Patch Adams (1998)
I must say, I was hoping my random sampling would land me on titles a
bit more like "The Concorde - Airport '79," "Gymkata," or the most
wonderfully awful film title I've ever heard, "Rape Squad" (1975). But
I guess those examples will do.
Except for "Fathers Day," I've at least heard of them all. With
"Color of Night," "Jennifer 8" and "Patch Adams," I find myself
immediately looking forward to reading some bad reviews that share my
suspicions about the films.
I can't flip to five random pages of YMS because I threw it away.
Oh, a quick Google search tells me I've already posted this exact set
of thoughts. I'll just paste the rest, and save a bit of typing.
-----
I loved Ebert's "I Hated Hated Hated This Movie," because it was full
of reviews of the memorably worst movies for many decades. To me, the
picture on the cover expressed the fun you could have while reading
it.
http://www.amazon.com/I-Hated-This-Movie/dp/0740706721
Similarly, I think that the cover of "Your Movie Sucks" also indicates
the kind of "fun" you can expect while reading it:
http://www.amazon.com/Your-Movie-Sucks-Roger-Ebert/dp/074076 3660
(Just posting those URLs, I notice that the book I dislike got 4.5
stars to the first book's 3.5 stars. Bizarre!)
Anyway, the new book only includes reviews from about five years worth
of movies -- basically, the early part of the 2000's. And that's just
not enough material from which to cull a fun book.
So, instead of a book that dates all the way back to bizarre '70s
oddities like Food of the Gods, The Devil's Rain, and Rape Squad, you
instead get dozens of reviews of boring little romantic comedies where
the characters generated no chemistry. And little dramas that just
fell flat. And so on.
-----
I really like Ebert, and I would totally recommend his first book. But
the movies in the second one, and his reviews of them, were just too
dull.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big pile of Roger Ebert snark [message #170243 is a reply to message #170237] |
Tue, 23 December 2008 18:26 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Fish Eye no Miko
On Dec 23, 2:24 am, dgates <dga...@somedomain.com> wrote:
..
> I really like Ebert, and I would totally recommend his first book.
> But the movies in the second one, and his reviews of them,
> were just too dull.
Yeah, I'm thinking of getting IHHHTM... Cuz, yeah, YMS is... just
ok...
Catherine Johnson, who does love the review that gave the book its
title, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big pile of Roger Ebert snark [message #170356 is a reply to message #170354] |
Wed, 24 December 2008 04:57 |
|
|
Originally posted by: dgates
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 15:51:13 -0800 (PST), Doug Elrod
<dre1@cornell.edu> wrote:
> On Dec 23, 3:24 am, dgates <dga...@somedomain.com> wrote:
>> Similarly, I think that the cover of "Your Movie Sucks" also indicates
>> the kind of "fun" you can expect while reading it:
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/Your-Movie-Sucks-Roger-Ebert/dp/074076 3660
>
> BIG fun? ;-) Personally, I'm enjoying that cover. It makes me
> think of a character in a Bergman film... perhaps the movie-critic
> cousin of that cowled fellow in "The Seventh Seal".
>
> -Doug Elrod (dre1@cornell.edu)
> So, people aren't making bad movies fast enough for Roger Ebert?
Don't get me wrong. I really like the guy, and would love to see
people keep buying his books. I just had a strong preference for the
first book.
Has anyone else here read them both?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Big pile of Roger Ebert snark [message #170361 is a reply to message #170360] |
Thu, 25 December 2008 05:02 |
|
|
Originally posted by: dgates
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 15:39:43 -0800, Jim Ellwanger
<usenet@ellwanger.tv> wrote:
> In article <up14l4tas2r7e8vfsu57cdle4eibga3vup@4ax.com>,
> dgates <dgates@somedomain.com> wrote:
>
>> Has anyone else here read them both?
>
> Yes. I agree that "Hated, Hated, Hated" is better, because it contains
> the cream of the crop of Ebert reviews of bad films, but "Your Movie
> Sucks" is certainly pleasant enough.
Here ya go. Try this URL and see if it drops you into a review from
the book -- "Alex and Emma":
http://tinyurl.com/9c7p83
(This Google Book Search / Preview function is amazing. Is it
possible that I'm really scrolling through the whole book?)
To me, the "Alex and Emma" review kind of sums up what I didn't like
about the book. A very bland movie. Reading the review, it just
seemed like hundeds of bland comedies that I choose not to see. And I
didn't fine it that interesting to read about.
Similarly... "Almost Salinas?" "The Amati Girls?"
I had to skip along past 5 or 6 reviews until I got to a couple that
seemed fun or interesting to me -- "Baise Moi" and "Ballistic: Ecks
vs. Sever."
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
