Logo by Matt Hinrichs
Theme by Anders Norén
September 28, 2001
Ebert gets seriously pissy about Ben Stiller’s new movie.
PostedSeptember 28, 2001 — 6:29 am
September 28, 2001 — 4:57 pm
Whoa–pretty disappointing from ol’ Roger, isn’t it? If you’re going to view everything though the post-WTC lens, including deliberately silly comedies, then the world of entertainment is going to be pretty joyless, isn’t it? What’s next? “I couldn’t watch Harry Potter without thinking of the children orphaned by the blast” or “Fellowship of the Ring reminds me that we should be focused n the true battle between good and evil in the world, not on som big-screen fantasy.” I’m honestly not trying to be insensitive here, but Roger needs to get a grip (or just get some perspective).
September 28, 2001 — 8:35 pm
I am totally with Max. While I understand what Ebert is going for (heightened sensitivity, deeper issues) I just gotta say I am really down with seeing that movie right now. I can’t help it. I am all for a goofy romantic comedy (See: Serendipity) or a slapstick (ie: Zoolander). It’s where we are right now, in coming to grips with reality…well, we need a little less chaos, and a little more Julia Roberts. Okay, maybe not her, but someone like her.
September 29, 2001 — 1:52 am
put me down for more john.
instead of the “Serendipity,” may i have an order of the “Grosse Pointe” Cusack? that still comes with a side order of Piven, right?
September 29, 2001 — 9:16 am
Mmm… Piven. I love me some Piven.
September 29, 2001 — 6:54 pm
I just saw a sneak preview of ‘Serendipity.’ Mmmmmm…John Cusack and Jeremy Piven. It’s a very very cute movie. The boys in the theater w/ us almost choked on the estrogen
Comments are closed.