Author Topic: Shocker: Roger Ebert didn’t like Atlas Shrugged  (Read 1567 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Spiraling Leopard

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Silver Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5423
  • Eternal Vigilance
    • PIGtube-channel:
Shocker: Roger Ebert didn’t like Atlas Shrugged
« on: April 21, 2011, 02:05:45 PM »
http://www.ihatethemedia.com/roger-ebert-didnt-like-atlas-shrugged

[click link for video]

Why can’t liberal journalists be honest? If they believe in a specific brand of political philosophy, that’s fine, but shouldn’t they stick to facts when making their case?

Roger Ebert is a longtime supporter of the Democrat Party and unabashed admirer of Michael Moore (They look alike, don’t they? Has anybody ever seen both of them at the same time?) so nobody was overly surprised when he didn’t like Atlas Shrugged, which hit theatres April 16.

Most Ayn Rand fans were actually pleased that he wasn’t pleased, because a bad review by Roger Ebert is often a harbinger of success. And vice versa. He panned Die Hard, for example, a movie so popular it spawned three sequels (so far) and made over a billion dollars (so far). But he lauded Speed 2: Cruise Control, one of the biggest box office bombs in history.

In 2010 he gave three stars to both Toy Story 3, which grossed over a billion dollars, and mega-flop Knight and Day, which didn’t even cover its production costs, saying of the latter, “Basically, what I wanted was more of it.” Him and nobody else, apparently.

Oh, and he labeled Clint Eastwood’s classic Dirty Harry “fascist” while praising Moore’s Sicko for peddling the propaganda of actual real-life fascist Fidel Castro. Go figure.


 
Unsurprisingly, while giving Atlas Shrugged a rating of one star and making fun of just about every aspect of its production, Ebert also took the time to add a dishonest characterization of Ayn Rand’s philosophy: “For me, that philosophy reduces itself to: ‘I’m on board; pull up the lifeline,’” he said in his snarkiest movie critic tone.

Three choices here: either he doesn’t have the IQ to comprehend Rand’s philosophy, or he never read it, or he’s being intentionally dishonest.

Ebert claims that his film reviews are “relative, not absolute” meaning they are intended for what he feels are the film’s prospective audience. So how come Atlas Shrugged is running an A- rating on Yahoo! User Reviews?

Perhaps he meant some other prospective audience?