RSS

Tag Archives: Ebert’s bad reviews

49. The Elephant Man (1980)


Roger’s Rating :

Should be :

Roger was not really fond of this great movie. He says in his two star review “I kept asking myself what the film was really trying to say about the human condition as reflected by John Merrick, and I kept drawing blanks. The film’s philosophy is this shallow: (1)Wow, the Elephant Man sure looked hideous, and (2) gosh, isn’t it wonderful how he kept on in spite of everything?”
I think Roger missed the point of the movie. The movie explores what it means to be human. At first even Dr. Treves thought John Merrick was probably an idiot. He is stunned when he finds out he had judged the book by its cover. 
I think the movie strongly makes the point that people shouldn’t be treated differently just because they look or sound different. Is this really a shallow point? Maybe it is simplistic and obvious, but it must be remembered that we have a history of judging people by how they looked and it lasted for over two hundred years in this country.
John Hurt’s makeup was made from casts of Merrick’s body, which had been preserved in the private museum of the Royal London Hospital. It was so convincing that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences was prompted to create a new category for Best Make-up for the Oscars because of this movie.
This very moving movie was nominated for eight Academy Awards including Best Picture. It has an 8.4 rating on IMDB and a 91% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.
 
Comments Off on 49. The Elephant Man (1980)

Posted by on February 19, 2010 in Roger's Worst

 

Tags:

39. Army of Darkness (1983)


Roger’s Rating :

Should be :

Roger gave this movie a Thumbs Down in his At The Movies review. Roger liked the state of the art special effects but can’t recommend the movie because he said “it’s not that funny, because most of the funny stuff in this movie was already seen in his movie from 1987 Evil Dead II which this one is allegedly kind of a sequel to.”
In his written review Roger gave the movie 2 stars. He says “The movie isn’t as funny or entertaining as Evil Dead II, however, maybe because the comic approach seems recycled. Then again, the movie seems aimed at an audience of 14-year olds, who would have been 8 when Evil Dead II came out, so maybe this will all seem breathtakingly original.”
I think this movie can stand on its own and should be judged on its own. It’s funny, entertaining and seems to have gotten even better with age (and I’m not 14 years old). It’s very rare when you get good comic writing paired with good special effects. On IMDB it has a 7.6 rating and has a 75% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

 
Comments Off on 39. Army of Darkness (1983)

Posted by on February 13, 2010 in Ebert's worst reviews

 

Tags:

29. Miller’s Crossing (1990)


Roger’s Rating :

Should be :

Roger didn’t have much love for the early Coen Brothers’ movies. He gave this great movie 3 stars in his review but he thought it had more style than substance. He says in his review : “This doesn’t look like a gangster movie, it looks like a commercial intended to look like a gangster movie. Everything is too designed. That goes for the plot and the dialogue, too. The dialogue is well-written, but it is indeed written. We admire the prose rather than the message. People make threats, and we think about how elegantly the threats are worded.”
IMDB has it at 8.0 at Rotten Tomatoes has it at 90%.
I love this movie, which is able to wink at the gangster genre, while at the same time adding to it. The twisting, the crossings, the style, the acting … a wonderful movie. One of my all time favorites.


At The Movies Review

 
Comments Off on 29. Miller’s Crossing (1990)

Posted by on February 4, 2010 in Ebert's worst

 

Tags:

15. Dead Man (1995)


Roger’s Rating :

Should be :

I’ve seen this movie about five times and each time I have seen I have liked it better. I was really surprised to see the negative review by Roger on it. Roger only gave it 1 1/2 stars. He said :

“Jim Jarmusch is trying to get at something here, and I don’t have a clue what it is. Are the machines of the East going to destroy the nature of the West? Is the white man doomed, and is the Indian his spiritual guide to the farther shore? Should you avoid any town that can’t use another accountant? Watching the film, I was reminded of the original William Blake’s visionary drawings and haunting poems. Leaving the theater, I came home and took down my Blake and spent a very pleasant half-hour. So the evening was not a loss.”

I was a little disappointed that because Roger didn’t get what Jarmusch was saying he was willing to dismiss it so quickly (I don’t think the poetry of William Blake is too easy to get either.) I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t have a great understanding of what Jarmusch was trying to get at, but that just makes it more interesting for me. As William Blake moves across the country we see the people on the train change from change from well dressed Easterners to animal skin clothed primitives. I think the movie is talking about the negative impact that the white man had on the West. It looks at the senselessness of racism, hate, greed and violence.  It also looked at the environmental destruction that “progress” brought to the land. William Blake begins his journey as an innocent and gradually takes on the trappings of those around him. Nobody, who is neither an Indian or a white, helps to guide him on his journey towards death.
It was fun to just watch Johnny Depp, Robert Mitchum. and Gary Farmer and to listen to the haunting guitar score by Neil Young. A strange, unsettling and very entertaining movie.
Overall, despite the slow pace that the movie travels at and its art house style (it’s in black and white), the movie is very popular. It has a 7.7 rating on IMDB and 71% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes.
I think Roger should put down his poetry for a little while and give this movie another chance.


At the Movies Review
 
Comments Off on 15. Dead Man (1995)

Posted by on January 13, 2010 in Roger's Worst

 

Tags: