Voting

Monday, March 28, 2011

Me N' Ebert

I have decided firmly that I have an enemy. That enemy is Roger Ebert. Let me explain.

So I'm on Netflix.com, I'm shirking doing my speech and I'm looking at this old movie I liked as a child, "The Borrowers" since the kids have been watching so much of "The Littles", you see the relevance. I click on "Reviews" and accidentally hit "Critic Reviews" and there is Roger again. "Good Lord! That man is everywhere!" but I click the link anyway, and read his review which is about as helpful as if I had said "There is this movie about people and they are small." Then I look at his review of the Muppet Movie. Then his review of Muppets Take Manhattan. Then Space Jam. Then Loony Tunes: Back in Action. And I have come to this conclusion; me and Roger Ebert are psychological opposites. If you put the two of us in a room together I think the universe would implode.
Ebert believes the Muppet Movie is good but nowhere near Who Framed Roger Rabbit. He compares it to getting to see the origins of Spider Man. He believes Kermit's character only really comes into his own in Muppet's Take Manhattan. (?!) Then things get worse. He calls Space Jam "...a happy marriage of good ideas..." I just about passed out "Dear GOD..." I thought "This man liked Space Jam and he is not in an asylum..." No, he is not. He is being payed out the wazoo to review movies while I am an unknown. And look, I know what you might be thinking- You didn't see Space Jam. Maybe you remember that it sold really well in the 90's. I read that. I'm willing to face the possibility that the population at large once thought it a decent film. All I'm asking is that if you think that, go and watch it. Right now. If it doesn't make you want to commit suicide in a violent way, tell me, and I will immediately seek help for my seriously delusional fantasy about what is obviously a remarkable movie.
Not only does he believe...that to be...you know...not...terrible, in his review of Looney Tunes: Back in Action he supports the uneducated view that Daffy Duck is the best looney Tunes character and Bugs Bunny would be nothing without him. I would love to argue this theory out with him in an informed adult way, but due to my lack of maturity I'm sure I would end up just whacking at him with a large blunt object until I forced him to take back what he said, because honestly and truly, Bugs Bunny rocks. Daffy is no where close. Seriously.
So now I'm forced to ask the question; what exactly makes a good reviewer? I mean really, if I wanted to be the next Roger Ebert (not that I do), what would I need to get good at? Is it based on recommendation? If I say "go watch this" and people do and the majority of them enjoy it, does that make me a good reviewer? Or vise-versa? Or is it maybe based on my ability to sell the film? If I write a review that makes you go "Oh my goodness! I have got to see this Space Jam film! It sounds awesome!!" is that it? Or...vise-versa? Or maybe the inevitable conclusion is that movie reviewing is really and honestly the easiest job in the universe because it doesn't actually matter a flyin' flip what you write about films? Gee. This could get real depressing and philosophical real fast.

But I ain't gonna go there. I know I'm nowhere near reviewing blockbusters from an office in New York or having my T.V. show and book, but look Ebert, I'm tellin' ya now- watch out. I am not discouraged. I am both younger, nicer, better looking, (but seriously, does he not look like a flesh-and-blood caricature of Carl Frederickson from UP?) And if you say one snide thing about Porky Pig, I'm comin' after ya man. No joke.








So that's what I've got for today. A slight cold, gloomy weather and too many episodes of "The Littles" have put me in a jealous, violent mood. Speaking of violence and the Littles, I want you to meet someone;

This is Dinky. Ruby had a dream about him and I have been continually taunting her with him all week. Although it has been one of the funniest things ever, it has made me realize a malicious, unstoppably evil side to myself I never knew was there. So I'm making the public announcement now that I'm going to stop before I end up searching the globe for someone who looks and sounds exactly like him (poor dope), acquiring a marriage license, fanangling Ruby into a wedding dress and forcing them both to an alter. A week ago I would have put it past myself.

And yes, before someone asks I do plan to review another movie. This time I think I'm going to try one of the popular (in the 1930's) comedies "The Dead End Kids" about a bunch of kids with goofy names like "Mugsy" and "Slick" who all talk like Bugs Bunny growing up on the streets of New York.


P.S. Well look, Ebert has been making fun of people for years, can't I just have a couple laughs before he kicks the bucket?'


P.P.S. If I rent "The Borrowers", it to will be reviewed. A million promises.

6 comments:

Jon said...

Possibly the funniest photo comparison ever!! Keep it up, girl. You've got natural talent!

Christina said...

Yes, I love the photo comparison. Too funny! Love reading your blog. Keep writing. I want to hear some of what you are reading. ;-)

Bruce said...

I respect your opinion over Mr. Ebert any day.

VWbugnut said...

Well I respect your opinion over my opinion over Mr. Ebert's opinion anyday also.

wb4kvz said...

While I don't agree with a lot of Roger Ebert's reviews I am not too big on saying things concerning his appearance. Mr. Ebert has had quite a bout with cancer and underwent facial reconstruction and now talks with the aide of a electronic device.
Locks, I agree you are younger and better looking than he is but we should work from a position of graceful respect even if we disagree.

I did have something funny happen to me though...concerning looks.
Not long ago Iskay asked me about a wart I have that has started coming up on my face. I told him you can only get those if you are special...to which he replied.."YOU ARE NOT SPECIAL AT ALL!" zinged by a three year old...gee

VWbugnut said...

Esther, has said much worse, just sayin'.

And there was no offence meant by the photo comparison, I didn't know Mr. Ebert had any reconstruction done (It seemed perfectly natural to me that his personality and looks should match those of Carl Frederickson) and in all honesty if I had the faintest idea he might actually READ this I would probably delete the whole post.
And some people just look like Carl Frederickson. That's fine, there are plenty of WORSE people to look like.