Roger Ebert is an Idiot. My guess is that his age has impieded his ability to recognize modern open minded intelligent comedy. The review that he gave toward the Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galexy is a prime example of how the elderly are not only resiliant to change but also toward the future of inter-racial aquaitances. Furthermore, i feel that anyone that has the odacity to judge such an epic story as the Guide souly on the movie (without comparing it to the book ie: reading the book) is not only a fool, but an illiterate asshole to boot. So, on behalf of Douglas Adams fans everywhere: F**K YOU ROGER EBERT.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mark f,

Legitimate, but I still say Harumph!

quote:

Originally posted by StrikerCrash:
Furthermore, i feel that anyone that has the odacity to judge such an epic story as the Guide souly on the movie (without comparing it to the book ie: reading the book) is not only a fool, but an illiterate asshole to boot. So, on behalf of Douglas Adams fans everywhere: FUCK YOU ROGER EBERT.

Um...if you're gonna call someone else illiterate, at least spell "solely" and "audacity" correctly. At least you spelled "fuck" correctly.

quote:

Originally posted by philosopherEric:

quote:

Originally posted by StrikerCrash:
Furthermore, i feel that anyone that has the odacity to judge such an epic story as the Guide souly on the movie (without comparing it to the book ie: reading the book) is not only a fool, but an illiterate asshole to boot. So, on behalf of Douglas Adams fans everywhere: FUCK YOU ROGER EBERT.

Um...if you're gonna call someone else illiterate, at least spell "solely" and "audacity" correctly. At least you spelled "fuck" correctly.

Add "Acquaintances" to the list of words he misspelled pE.

People who get passionately mad at movie critics who disagree with them intrigue me...it is OK to have a different opinion about a movie and still not be an "asshole." This same thing happened with that Mad Angry Grandma movie with Ebert vs. black people...what the hell? He didn't like the movie, that doesn't mean he's a racist.

Good catch, pax. I found the irony of the illiterate jab far too funny to ignore.

The other funny thing is that I LOVED the Hitchhiker's Guide books and found the film to be not so hot. The fact that StrikerCrash claims to speak for all Douglas Adams fans is awfully presumptive of him. I'm not sure why Ebert should be required to judge both the book AND the movie. He's a FILM critic. The fact that he judges a film AS A FILM shouldn't be shocking. The movie was lame. The book was good. Ebert shouldn't have to give the movie bonus points because the book was good. Plenty of good books have been made into shitty movies.

I didn't do a spell check, but I'm pretty sure I'm safe here.

Hi, bonehead. A few points:

1). There is a forum for discussing movie critics and publications, and this ain't it (Edit: Scratch this bit; this thread was in General Movie Discussion to begin with).
2). Agreeing with pE here; learn to write English at above a fifth-grade level before you start calling others illiterate (as for me, I like this guy's words "impieded" and "galexy").
3). Ebert never judged the story of the book Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in his review.

Thank you for your time.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Biggles,

Since I love bashing so much, I would also like to add that you as the reader of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (book form) should be far more critical to the movie than Ebert. I figured you fan-boys would be the first to scream "TERRIBLE ADAPTATION OF A GREAT BOOK" and not stick out your leg for the movie version and raving just because (presumably because) it has the Hitchhiker's name attatched. Get over that it wasn't that good!

Amen, N-Z. I wanted to take the "fan boy" shot but decided against it. I'm glad someone else did.

I thought the movie, overall, was underwhelming. Not BAD, just not very memorable. Since I really enjoyed the book, I tried to judge them in insolation. I don't think I had any hopes...I just wanted the movie to be more entertaining than it was.

Note that StrikerCrash has failed to make any appearances since his post. Big surprise.

Ha Ha. You guys also missed "impieded" and "Galexy". This was my mini-review.

quote:

Originally posted by mark f:
Ha Ha. You guys also missed "impieded" and "Galexy".

Sorry Marky, but Biggles actually noticed those ones first (see four posts up). But you guys all missed "resiliant," which should be "resilient."

You mean that people are STILL reading THIS?

Since I want to hear this guy reply- and since my spelling is less than perfect, I won't get involved in that. However, this conversations kind of opened up space for a whole new one. FAN-DOM! Yes, extreme fan-boys and their reactions to the critic's opinions. I really hope -for Ebert's sake- that he thoroughly enjoys Star Wars Episode III or I fear that the news headlines may read "EBERT BEHEADED BY TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED LASER-SWORD." Yes, that and how they rant on and on about "is Boba Fett really dead" and other things. There is actually a message board on www.theforce.net that has continued on about the death of Boba Fett for, I THINK 400 pages! A friend whose kept tabs on it since the beginning says its been going on for 4 or 5 years! Craziness.

Let's not talk smack about Roger. The guy is passionate about films, like it or not, and that's important. He's also a friend of this site. He spent some time with us in 2001, helping us hone our scoring system and giving us some extremely helpful advice. They guy cares about movies, so let's not associate your crass expletives with his name.....

I grew up in Chicago and watched the first season of Sneak Previews with Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel. A couple years ago I noticed that Roger was giving a thumbs up to a lot of worthless movies that years ago he never would have. I was irritated at him for this until I realized that my taste had changed as well. I can like a mainstream piece of crap like "Guess Who" simply for watching Bernie Mac's facial expressions. I can be bored stiff by "I Love Huckabees" and "Life Aquatic" even though they were made by writer/directors that are among my favorites. My point is that we don't need famous critics to validate our tastes. I still maintain that "Sideways" was too long, not half as funny or well written as the critics felt it was, and could have been improved tremendously by focusing on the more interesting women characters and keeping the story in wine country w/the men driving through. I'm sure most of the viewers wanted to see more of Sandra Oh.

quote:

Originally posted by StrikerCrash:
Roger Ebert is an Idiot. My guess is that his age has impieded his ability to recognize modern open minded intelligent comedy. The review that he gave toward the Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galexy is a prime example of how the elderly are not only resiliant to change but also toward the future of inter-racial aquaitances. Furthermore, i feel that anyone that has the odacity to judge such an epic story as the Guide souly on the movie (without comparing it to the book ie: reading the book) is not only a fool, but an illiterate asshole to boot. So, on behalf of Douglas Adams fans everywhere: F**K YOU ROGER EBERT.

He's illiterate? What does that make you? You have so many misspellings and grammatical errors in your stupid post, it's laughable.

Everyone worth a damn gave Hitchhiker's ... the same review - meh. Grow up you baby.

Just for humors sake, I can say a bit about Ebert, even though he is my favorite critic. I have a question: Does he actually watch all of the movies he reviews? Example: His Happy Gilmore review says that Happy murders his father, which is completely untrue. Also, (yes, hard to explain why) I was looking at reviews for the movie "Homeward Bound" a lovely childrens movie. A minor flaw in his review is that he names the characters "Ben the wise one, Rattler the brash one, and Tiki, the spoiled feline." I know the characters to be Shadow, Chance, and ...Sassy! Of course, no one else has the testicles to flat out admit to knowing anything about this childs film.

The last time I scratched, I THOUGHT I had testicles, and I'd say you're right. Maybe I'll check into Ebert's site, or maybe not. I may have more important eggs to fry.

Yeah, most people do. I generally waste time by perusing rottentomatoes and starting with ONE film, then say, clicking on the director and seeing the filmography, then clicking on one of the movies listed, and clicking on an actor, then clickin on a similar film that they list. Its really quite fun and you can find some great movies.

OK, I hate to veer from the common theme of this thread, that being flaming Striker for being a total idiot, but you always run the risk of sounding quite foolish when knocking someone else for their grammar and spelling, and it seems as if philosopherEric has slipped up. You claimed that you judged the book and the movie in "insolation"...I'm almost positive you meant isolation It is always easy to gang up on someone and bash him, especially when he is not here to defend himself, but please, practice what you preach. It is painfully obvious that you simply run your replies through a spellcheck and rely on that to catch your errors Maybe you should check your grammar yourself before flaming others, just a thought.

IPswich

I am going to assume that this new person is just Striker under a psuedo-name since both have one post, and I doubt that anyone would join the forum merely to defend someone who is clearly irrational.

You, IP, must not be aware that PE has made well over one thousand posts and almost all of them are without error. You found one out of 1925 posts with a spelling error and you get on his case. Strker has made one post and he made around ten spelling errors. Now you be the judge, were the spelling errors by Strker made because the person did not use a program to detect error or because the person lacked basic knowledge of the English language. This means that PE may have slipped up, but Striker is just dumb. This is how Striker's post should have been:

quote:

Roger Ebert is an Idiot(1. Idiot should be lower case). My guess is that his age has impieded(2. There is no "I" in "impeded") his ability to recognize modern (3. ",") open (4. "-")minded (5. ",") intelligent (6. ",") comedy. The review that he gave toward the Hitch (7. "Hitchhiker" is one word 8. The movie's title should be quotated) Hikers Guide to the Galexy (9. spelled "Galaxy") is a prime example of how the elderly are not only resiliant (10. Spelled "resilient") to change but also toward the future of inter-racial (11. "Interracial" is one word) aquaitances(12. Spelled "acquaintance"). Furthermore, i (13. "I" should be capitalized)feel that anyone that has the odacity (14. Spelled "Audacity")to judge such an epic story as the Guide souly (15. Spelled "Solely") on the movie (without comparing it to the book ie: reading the book) is not only a fool, but an illiterate asshole to boot. So, on behalf of Douglas Adams fans everywhere: F**K YOU ROGER EBERT.

That is fifteen errors in 112 words. That is around 10 percent of the post. Now before you judge an excellent member of this forum for one error on one post, how about judging a member who joins to criticize a movie critic's subjective article and in the process destroys the English language. Grow up, IP.

A couple random thoughts, why get so angry because someone called something you like "Average." Who cares? If you like something you shouldn't need others to tell you that it is good. And another thing for someone who claims to love the books I thought it was quite ironic that Striker misspelled "Galaxy."