Pulse en una miniatura para ir a Google Books.
|
Cargando... Your Movie Sucks (2007)por Roger Ebert
   Ninguno Actualmente no hay Conversaciones sobre este libro.   ) tombomp | Oct 31, 2023 |  Best taken in small doses, the reviews take unerring aim at miscasting, plot failures, editing disasters, and atrocious performances. It might better have been organized along those lines, rather than simply set up in alphabetical order by title. Ebert also has a tendency to wander off-topic, at least when reviewing movies he doesn't like. Occasionally he devotes more words to the director's last hit or a better film with a similar plot than he spends on the flick he's supposedly writing about. Quibbles aside, movie fans will undoubtedly find opinions they agree with as well as those they disagree with. Less avid fans of the cinema will at least have a list of movies to avoid. And pretty well everyone will come away with a favorite quote about badness -- "This movie is eye candy for the blind", or "watching it is like taking a bus trip with someone who has needed a bath for a long time". My personal favorite was "the mystery is solved by stomping in thick-soled narrative boots through the squishy marsh of contrivance." ( )1  LyndaInOregon | Jan 17, 2021 | ) lesindy | Nov 1, 2014 | )1 mmyoung | May 9, 2013 | (  ) Veeralpadhiar | Mar 31, 2013 | sin reseñas | añadir una reseña
Roger Ebert's I Hated Hated Hated This Movie, which gathered some of his most scathing reviews, was a best-seller. This new collection continues the tradition, reviewing not only movies that were at the bottom of the barrel, but also movies that he found underneath the barrel. From Roger's review of Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo (0 stars): "The movie created a spot of controversy in February 2005. 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. . . .' 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." No se han encontrado descripciones de biblioteca. |
Debates activosNingunoCubiertas populares
 Google Books — Cargando...GénerosSistema Decimal Melvil (DDC)791The arts Recreational and performing arts Public performancesClasificación de la Biblioteca del CongresoValoraciónPromedio: (3.63)
¿Eres tú?Conviértete en un Autor de LibraryThing. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1