I get the impression that Roger felt this film was not good

[Fairportfan]

An excerpt from Roger Ebert's review of Rob Reiner's 1994 film, North:

I hated this movie. Hated hated hated hated hated this movie. Hated it. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it. Hated the sensibility that thought anyone would like it. Hated the implied insult to the audience by its belief that anyone would be entertained by it.

I think Roger was trying to tell us something, there...

[bmonk]

But, do you get the idea that, with a slight edit, it might be good?

[Dave]

Only for values of "slight edit" which involve a massive, overkill-level strike with three-stage thermonuclear weapons.

Ebert's review reads like the equivalent of the Pythonesque "This is not a wine for drinking. This is a wine for laying down and avoiding."

[Fairportfan]

Only for values of "slight edit" which involve a massive, overkill-level strike with three-stage thermonuclear weapons.

Ebert's review reads like the equivalent of the Pythonesque "This is not a wine for drinking. This is a wine for laying down and avoiding."

Or Dorothy Parker's:

This is not a book to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

Or the wonderful review of a Lillian Hellman (i think) book:

Every word in it is a lie, and that includes "a", "an" and "the".

[Atomic]

Sounds like a challenge for Uwe Boll to do a remake. It might cancel things out.

[Mark N]

Sounds like a challenge for Uwe Boll to do a remake. It might cancel things out.

Too bad Roger would not be able to review it for us.

[Fairportfan]

I dunno - a thunderbolt from the clear blue heavens...?

[MerchManDan]

Pretty much the ultimate "thumbs down."

[bmonk]

Only for values of "slight edit" which involve a massive, overkill-level strike with three-stage thermonuclear weapons.

Ebert's review reads like the equivalent of the Pythonesque "This is not a wine for drinking. This is a wine for laying down and avoiding."

Or Dorothy Parker's:

This is not a book to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

Or the wonderful review of a Lillian Hellman (i think) book:

Every word in it is a lie, and that includes "a", "an" and "the".

My favorite review has always been, "This book fills a much-needed void."

But Ebert was never afraid to say it like he saw it: "Mad Dog Time is the first movie I have seen that does not improve on the sight of a blank screen viewed for the same length of time. Oh, I've seen bad movies before. But they usually made me care about how bad they were. Watching Mad Dog Time is like waiting for the bus in a city where you're not sure they have a bus line."