TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Ebert and Roper's review of The Powerpuff Girls Movie?

Go To

Buscemi I Am The Walrus from a log cabin Since: Jul, 2010
I Am The Walrus
#26: Aug 1st 2011 at 5:15:38 PM

Ebert is a fan of Avatar: The Last Airbender.

More Buscemi at http://forum.reelsociety.com/
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#27: Aug 1st 2011 at 5:25:35 PM

[up]What are you talking about? He hated that movie.

Pannic Since: Jul, 2009
#28: Aug 1st 2011 at 5:28:19 PM

Of the animated series. In his review of the movie, he bemoans the missed opportunity.

BaronofBarons Perpetual Noob Since: Oct, 2009
Perpetual Noob
#29: Aug 1st 2011 at 5:30:34 PM

[up][up][up] That somewhat disproves my theory, though A.) it received a Live-Action Adaptation, not a normal The Movie, and B.) it's easier to see at a glance why people like Avatar than Powerpuff Girls.

[up][up] He's talking about the show. Ebert actually mentioned liking it in his review of the film.

edited 1st Aug '11 5:30:43 PM by BaronofBarons

I put on my robe and tinfoil hat...
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#30: Aug 1st 2011 at 5:53:37 PM

Must have skipped that part though I recall he mentioned it as being better I don't remember him actually saying he particularly liked the source material. It doesn't seem like his thing with all the magic and such.

ninjaclown Since: May, 2009
#31: Aug 1st 2011 at 8:20:36 PM

Well, he did. But really, anything looks better in comparison to the movie.

edited 1st Aug '11 8:20:42 PM by ninjaclown

BearyScary Since: Sep, 2010 Relationship Status: You spin me right round, baby
#32: Aug 1st 2011 at 11:35:05 PM

With all due respect, Ebert does tend to speak too much about things that he knows too little about.

Do not obey in advance.
Rou I Drink Your Milkshake from The Land Of Make Believe Since: Jul, 2011
I Drink Your Milkshake
#33: Aug 2nd 2011 at 2:28:45 AM

I sincerely dislike Ebert for the simple reason that he doesn't know squat. Yes, this is my opinion, but I honestly believe that he has such a Mary Whitehouse manner of thinking that everytime a film doesn't fit into his tiny sack of morality he automatically dismisses it.

Is it really necessarry to insult the fans of this show? The review seems to be just one insult after another in regards to a children's film.

~Sickly •❤• Sweet~
Buscemi I Am The Walrus from a log cabin Since: Jul, 2010
I Am The Walrus
#34: Aug 2nd 2011 at 3:11:42 AM

Roeper insulted the fans, not Ebert. Roeper also didn't like Fellowship of the Ring.

More Buscemi at http://forum.reelsociety.com/
Shota Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Dancing with myself
#35: Aug 2nd 2011 at 5:12:17 AM

Ebert and Roper were split on Lilo And Stitch, with the former loving it and the latter hating it. This would be all well and good if it weren't for the fact that while the end credit were playing, Roper still drags on the argument by saying, "Btw, I still think Lilo & Stitch sucks."

Gray64 Since: Dec, 1969
#36: Aug 2nd 2011 at 6:15:51 AM

Ebert is a thoughtful, knowledgeable reviewer, much more openminded than most critics. That said, he does have his blindspots. He'll give something 4 stars if it's visually impressive enough even if the story is only subpar; he'll also give points for novelty even if that novelty doesn't serve the film's story. And you will hear about it if a film's male and female lead have romantic tension but don't end up together or at least having sex (Spider-Man, Hidalgo, etc; he really doesn't seem to like chaste heroes if there's a willing female partner around). He spent a good portion of his review of Treasure Planet complaining about the science fiction setting (rule 1 of critiquing: review what it is, not what it isn't). And, like most mainstream critics, he seems confused and angry about genre films made pretty much entirely for their core audience.

Pannic Since: Jul, 2009
#37: Aug 2nd 2011 at 9:38:34 AM

He really hated a lot of horror films, with the exceptions of Halloween and the first two Scream films.

edited 5th Aug '11 4:19:04 PM by Pannic

StarOutlaw Since: Nov, 2010
#38: Aug 2nd 2011 at 4:23:26 PM

[up]Based on all that, he sounds like a very introverted critic (not sure if that's the right word to use). When he reviews a film, it's very much his opinion alone, and he isn't really considering what kind of audience the film might be made for and how tastes may differ. This would end up meaning favoring certain genres over others.

I think it's better if a critic sticks to reviewing a genre that they actually do like. If someone doesn't like a certain genre, it's likely because he/she doesn't understand it and therefore probably shouldn't be critiquing it.

BearyScary Since: Sep, 2010 Relationship Status: You spin me right round, baby
#39: Aug 2nd 2011 at 5:31:31 PM

[up]What are you, mad? What will we do if reviews are made with the target audience in mind? Role playing games might get a fair shake! Who will we direct our misguided, impotent rage at?

Do not obey in advance.
Angewomon Digital Angel from Everywhere and Nowhere Since: Jan, 2011
Digital Angel
#40: Aug 2nd 2011 at 6:06:12 PM

Ebert and Roper were split on Lilo & Stitch, with the former loving it and the latter hating it. This would be all well and good if it weren't for the fact that while the end credit were playing, Roper still drags on the argument by saying, "Btw, I still think Lilo & Stitch sucks."
Okay, Roeper is officially an idiot.

Talk to the hand.
TheZMage Since: Oct, 2010
#41: Aug 2nd 2011 at 6:17:13 PM

Ebert generally does a pretty good job of reviewing movies in the spirit in which they are intended. If he's reviewing an action movie, he won't judge it on the same standards as Citizen Kane.

However, this has the unintended side effect of limiting what the show can do and be. He didn't pick up on Po being adopted in Kung Fu Panda (the first) despite the gigantic anvils dropped because he'd already decided that genetics were irrelevant in a funny animal movie. He made some significant mistakes of fact in his Thor review because he'd already decided it was going to be a dumb action movie. By seeking to review in view of the limitations, he ends up applying limitations.

edited 2nd Aug '11 6:17:40 PM by TheZMage

Shota Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Dancing with myself
#42: Aug 2nd 2011 at 7:51:08 PM

Paraphrased very much: "I am not the right person to review this movie. I have never seen the television show, nor any of the adaptations that resulted from it, knowing nothing about it, and yet, I can only hold contempt for this mess of a movie."

The movie: Scooby-Doo.

Gray64 Since: Dec, 1969
#43: Aug 2nd 2011 at 8:12:03 PM

To his credit, he does often respond in a reasoned and open-minded manner to criticism of his opinions on his blog.

Cider The Final ECW Champion from Not New York Since: May, 2009 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
The Final ECW Champion
#44: Aug 5th 2011 at 2:34:32 PM

...respectable critics.

Yeah, how exactly does one become a respectable critic? Go to film school, show up to work on time, work eight hours a day five days a week? Whatever the case they get paid to watch programs and give their opinions. Big deal. Even if they have a successful career in some other field a critic is a critic.

Modified Ura-nage, Torture Rack
Rottweiler Dog and Pony Show from Portland, Oregon Since: Dec, 2009
Dog and Pony Show
#45: Aug 5th 2011 at 2:57:58 PM

Ebert generally does a pretty good job of reviewing movies in the spirit in which they are intended. If he's reviewing an action movie, he won't judge it on the same standards as Citizen Kane.

Exactly. He tries to judge everything by how well it fulfills the artistic purpose of its genre. It's not accurate to say "Waaah, he's an old fart who hates superheroes/anime/whatever" when he's given Iron Man and most Hayao Miyazaki films four stars.

“Love is the eternal law whereby the universe was created and is ruled.” — St. Bernard
Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#46: Aug 5th 2011 at 3:13:09 PM

^^ One becomes a "respectable critic" by being a critic that a large number of people consider dependable and consistent.

Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#47: Aug 5th 2011 at 3:21:06 PM

I am always so amused when people see a review of something they disagree, and respond by attacking the reviewer.

Are you all so insecure in your opinions you can't risk seeing some that disagrees with them?

I like Ebert's reviews. I don't always agree with him. Quite often the opposites, but I always enjoy seeing his reasons for liking or disliking something.

nabaduco Since: Oct, 2010
#48: Aug 5th 2011 at 4:10:28 PM

[up] In the specific case of powerpuff girls, I think it is understandable to get mad as the guy actually called all the adults that like the film undesirable people he would not like to meet.

Buscemi I Am The Walrus from a log cabin Since: Jul, 2010
I Am The Walrus
#49: Aug 6th 2011 at 4:52:36 AM

Once again, Ebert didn't say that. Roeper did.

More Buscemi at http://forum.reelsociety.com/
TheGunheart Some nights I rule the world (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Some nights I rule the world
#50: Aug 6th 2011 at 12:12:32 PM

[up]Technically, he said something similar about anyone who liked the second Transformers movie. I hate that movie, too, but attacking the audience is just low.


Total posts: 58
Top