Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I used to think Ebert was kind of a dick back in the Siskel and Ebert days because I liked Siskel - and Ebert always gave thumbs up to Chuck Norris movies. But he's redeemed himself.

Though I still miss Siskel. RIP.

Awesome. Roger Ebert is at his best when he's ripping a film (or in this case the whole intelligent design movement) apart.

What a great movie. And I really miss Siskel and Ebert. D:

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Ebert agrees with me http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080925/REVIEWS/809250304/1023

Those guys had too much fun working together. If you liked this clip, here's another one you'll love:

http://www.videosift.com/video/Siskel-and-Ebert-Uncensored-Bloopers

Oh, and this should be *nsfw for language.

'...it will rock your balls off.' -newsweek

'FUCK YEAH!!! EIGHT THUMBS UP!!' -siskel & ebert

'Cinema's golden age begins today, with Megaforce' -new yorker

>> ^dag:
ba-ah ba-ah Batman. Cry the sheeple. Seriously, what do you think the skew of comicbook loving fanboys is on IMDB and RT?

True enough as far as the IMDB goes, but as for Rotten Tomatoes, that's a listing of professional reviewers only -- I don't know if I'd call people like Roger Ebert and Kirk Honeycutt comic book loving fanboys.

I looked up some info on "September Dawn" for you:

The film has received extraordinarily unfavorable reviews, and holds a 13% overall rating and a 0% Cream of the Crop rating at the aggregate site Rotten Tomatoes as of February 6, 2008. It received a rare "zero stars" review from film critic Roger Ebert, and the New York Post gave the movie an unusual 0/4.

The film has been described by various critics (most or all of whom are not LDS) as "the year's first honest-to-goodness exploitation flick," as "carrying an anti-Mormon agenda," as "some sort of attack piece on the Mormon religion," as "little more than wild-eyed anti-Mormon propaganda," as "a stridently anti-Mormon and cliché-heavy melodrama," as "unbelievably ugly and an insult to Mormons," as a "Swift Boating of Mormonism that advocates the religious intolerance it’s supposedly condemning," as "clearly anti-Mormon," as an "anti-Mormon broadside" that is "certain to fan the flames of hatred toward America's largest homegrown religion and continue the persecution that terrified the original Mormons."

The movie has "the chilling certitude of the self-righteous" that goes beyond "mockery" and is "practically a call to jihad [against Mormons]." It "equates the institution of the Mormon church with Islamic extremism at every opportunity," it is "propaganda pure and simple," is "filmmaking at its worst...full of propaganda," and it "goes way beyond history into the realm of speculation, rumor, myth and gossip." Critics further state that the movie "feel[s] like blatant propaganda," and that there is an "unmistakable air of evil about this enterprise, and not just an atrocity the Mormon church caused to happen 150 years ago" and its negative portrayal of Mormons is "unsubtle (in the manner most closely associated with Dr. Goebbels)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dawn

Ummmm...soooo...I wouldn't exactly base my opinions about Mormons on that movie.

Furthermore, Mormons do not pay their clergy and so are FAR FAR FAR less likely to be corrupt than other religions. I don't really see how corruption plays a role at all.

Every Mormon I have ever come into contact with has been extremely kind, happy, and helpful. I think that the media and other ignorant people choose to focus on the most unusual elements of the religion, take them out of context, and call them crazy. It is incredibly bigoted, intolerant, ignorant, and unkind. I think it is EXTREMELY unfair to compare the LDS church with Scientology. Ridiculous, in fact. For goodness' sake, they're good people. They're just misunderstood.

In reply to this comment by marinara:
pinky, you're trying to be fair to the mormons.
I would rather not be fair.
but then i just watched September Dawn.

I would rather ask.... is Mormons more or less of a con game, than say, Scientology? I actually liked L. Ron Hubbard, can't say the same for Joe Smith.

Mormonism = the church of the latter day saints and the elders and the corrupt and etc.

To Marinara:

I looked up some info on "September Dawn" for you:

The film has received extraordinarily unfavorable reviews, and holds a 13% overall rating and a 0% Cream of the Crop rating at the aggregate site Rotten Tomatoes as of February 6, 2008. It received a rare "zero stars" review from film critic Roger Ebert, and the New York Post gave the movie an unusual 0/4.

The film has been described by various critics (most or all of whom are not LDS) as "the year's first honest-to-goodness exploitation flick," as "carrying an anti-Mormon agenda," as "some sort of attack piece on the Mormon religion," as "little more than wild-eyed anti-Mormon propaganda," as "a stridently anti-Mormon and cliché-heavy melodrama," as "unbelievably ugly and an insult to Mormons," as a "Swift Boating of Mormonism that advocates the religious intolerance it’s supposedly condemning," as "clearly anti-Mormon," as an "anti-Mormon broadside" that is "certain to fan the flames of hatred toward America's largest homegrown religion and continue the persecution that terrified the original Mormons."

The movie has "the chilling certitude of the self-righteous" that goes beyond "mockery" and is "practically a call to jihad [against Mormons]." It "equates the institution of the Mormon church with Islamic extremism at every opportunity," it is "propaganda pure and simple," is "filmmaking at its worst...full of propaganda," and it "goes way beyond history into the realm of speculation, rumor, myth and gossip." Critics further state that the movie "feel[s] like blatant propaganda," and that there is an "unmistakable air of evil about this enterprise, and not just an atrocity the Mormon church caused to happen 150 years ago" and its negative portrayal of Mormons is "unsubtle (in the manner most closely associated with Dr. Goebbels)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dawn

Ummmm...soooo...I wouldn't exactly base my opinions about Mormons on that movie.

Furthermore, Mormons do not pay their clergy and so are FAR FAR FAR less likely to be corrupt than other religions. I don't really see how corruption plays a role at all.

Every Mormon I have ever come into contact with has been extremely kind, happy, and helpful. I think that the media and other ignorant people choose to focus on the most unusual elements of the religion, take them out of context, and call them crazy. It is incredibly bigoted, intolerant, ignorant, and unkind. I think it is EXTREMELY unfair to compare the LDS church with Scientology. Ridiculous, in fact. For goodness' sake, they're good people. They're just misunderstood.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Star Wars, summary, recap, toddler' to 'Star Wars, summary, recap, toddler, shirley, temple, roger, ebert, love, child' - edited by my15minutes

Damn these guys were crazy, I cant help feel after watching this that Siskel kicks ass and Ebert is just an ass

That's awesome. See, this is why the show went downhill after Siskel died -- Siskel and Ebert weren't exactly friends, which meant they weren't afraid to really disagree, and to go after each other when they did.

Ebert sounds like he's missing his sense of humour.

There is an ugly scene in "Bad Boys II" that I want to tell you about. A cop played by Martin Lawrence is alarmed that his 15-year-old daughter is going out on her first date. We see the girl, pretty and hopeful in her new dress, being fussed over by her mother. The doorbell rings, and Lawrence opens it to confront her date, a nervous 15-year-old boy, tall and thin, neatly dressed.

Marcus and his partner (Will Smith) intimidate the boy without mercy. He is threatened with the unspeakable if he lays a hand on the girl. They demand to know if he is a virgin. They slap him with the N-word. At one point a gun is pulled on him. "Ever had sex with a man?" Smith asks. Then with a leer: "Want to?" The boy is terrified.

The needless cruelty of this scene took me out of the movie and into the minds of its makers. What were they thinking? Have they so lost touch with human nature that they think audiences will like this scene? Do they think it's funny? Did the actors voice any objections? It's the job of the producer to keep a film on track; did Jerry Bruckheimer notice anything distasteful? Or is it possible that everyone connected with the film has become so desensitized by the relentless cynical aggression of movies like this that the scene passed without comment?

---Roger Ebert; Bad Boys II review July 18, 2003

Get well soon, Roger Ebert!