Horror.com Forums - Talk about horror.

Horror.com Forums - Talk about horror. (https://www.horror.com/forum/index.php)
-   Horror.com General Forum (https://www.horror.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Shitty Critiques (https://www.horror.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15709)

ShankS 05-26-2005 12:56 AM

the shit spiel on the covers, is there just for the mainstream viewers who watch/buy nothing but hollywood junk.

Vodstok 05-26-2005 04:28 AM

I watched something about this one time on tv a long time ago. The film studios were gathering up "film critics" from local news shows and radio shows, small town paper critics, nobodys like that, then setting them up in a 4 star hotel in LA or NY, then buying them a big dinner and showing them the movie, with suggestions that if they "like" it, they may be asked to attend another screening....

So context means very little when Jerry from East Bumfucked gets to have surf and turf 3 times a year for free because he thinks all of Newline's new horror "classics" are "Great, scarier than the Exorcist".

During the same report, Roger Ebert said he was a superior (read: "The only Qualified") critic, because he actually wrote a movie.

:rolleyes:
He wrote Beyond the Valley of the Dolls. I hardly think that makes him an oscar-worthy screenwriter...

Haunted 05-26-2005 05:33 AM

Rivetting.

Vodstok 05-26-2005 05:52 AM

My favorite:

"A roller-coaster ride of thrills."

That was original back in the 40s....

urgeok 05-26-2005 06:23 AM

i love it when a direct to video low budget ripoff of a blockbuster comes out and the reviewer (again some unknown from a town no-one has heard of) says 'it's better than - 'the origional'.

i bet these people dont exist or they are some unknown shitheads that were paid off to get their names on a video box cover.

Vodstok 05-26-2005 08:34 AM

or *cringe*

They actually BELIEVE what they are saying....

meetthecreeper 05-26-2005 10:34 AM

Roger Ebert I think is actually pretty decent, Gene Siskel was pretty good too, but the moron that replaced him, Richard Roeper, is a total fukin moron.

He gives a thumbs up to everything, he gave Josie and the Pussycats a thumbs up.

I remember the look on Eberts face.

I think he was thinking 'boy this guy is a fuckin moron, boy am I hungry'

Josie and the Pussycats??? I tried to watch it to see the appeal, I wanted to blow my brains out with a potato gun after the first 15 mins.

urgeok 05-26-2005 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by meetthecreeper
Roger Ebert I think is actually pretty decent, Gene Siskel was pretty good too, but the moron that replaced him, Richard Roeper, is a total fukin moron.

He gives a thumbs up to everything, he gave Josie and the Pussycats a thumbs up.

I remember the look on Eberts face.

I think he was thinking 'boy this guy is a fuckin moron, boy am I hungry'

Josie and the Pussycats??? I tried to watch it to see the appeal, I wanted to blow my brains out with a potato gun after the first 15 mins.

shit i thought it was ok ...
the parody of the boy band was hilarious ..
I recall most critics actually praising that film ...

i thought it was great fun .. Parker Posey was great as always ...
cant say a bad thing about it .. it was a pretty good adaptation of a cartoon..


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:59 AM.