reviews of this movie

[Goshzilla]

I think Ebert had some of the best quotes

"Battlefield Earth" is like taking a bus trip with someone who has needed a bath for a long time. It's not merely bad; it's unpleasant in a hostile way. The visuals are grubby and drab. The characters are unkempt and have rotten teeth. Breathing tubes hang from their noses like ropes of snot.

"Battlefield Earth" was written in 1980 by L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology. The film contains no evidence of Scientology or any other system of thought; it is shapeless and senseless, without a compelling plot or characters we care for in the slightest.

There is a moment here when the Psychlos' entire planet (home office and all) is blown to smithereens, without the slightest impact on any member of the audience (or, for that matter, the cast). If the film had been destroyed in a similar cataclysm, there might have been a standing ovation.

[kodiakthejuggler]

I'm bi-polar when it comes to Ebert. Sometimes, he's the smartest critic to ever review a movie, sometimes he's a complete imbecile who has no clue what he's saying(in the case of Weird Al's UHF, for example). Here, he's spot on!!

[mrbasehart]

Wasn't he the guy who walked out on Clerks II and then gave it bad review?

[BathTub]

no, that was someone else I am sure of it.

[BathTub]

http://silentbobspeaks.com/?p=263

Joel Siegel

[mrbasehart]

Ah, cheers, BT.  I'm glad it wasn't Ebert, he's generally a good guy.  However, what Siegel did is one of the most unprofessional things you can do in his business.

[gammer]

I've never read those reviews of BE before.

But I think they are pretty much snot...I mean spot on.

[Bob]

The BEST commentary I have heard on a DVD was Roger Ebert's commentary on "Dark City".   Entertaining and gives a lot of movie history.

[Johnny_Short_Torso]

I'm bi-polar when it comes to Ebert. Sometimes, he's the smartest critic to ever review a movie, sometimes he's a complete imbecile who has no clue what he's saying(in the case of Weird Al's UHF, for example). Here, he's spot on!!

Here here, UHF is still massively funny.

[Petey Wheatstraw]

Ebert is to movies what Rush Limbaugh is to politics. Just because they're occasionally right, doesn't mean that they're not morons.

Considering the fact that Ebert hates David Lynch (see: Dune, Blue Velvet, Wild at Heart and Lost Highway), I wouldn't trust him to wash my bathroom.

[6079SmithW]

Ebert is to movies what Rush Limbaugh is to politics. Just because they're occasionally right, doesn't mean that they're not morons.

Considering the fact that Ebert hates David Lynch (see: Dune, Blue Velvet, Wild at Heart and Lost Highway), I wouldn't trust him to wash my bathroom.

That's not fair. Ebert can be brilliant, Limbaugh is only ever right in that there's a limit to how many opinions you can spew before one of them isn't totally inaccurate. For instance, have you read any of Ebert's great films series? Every one of the entries works exactly as it is meant to, and makes me want to watch the movie and appreciate it again.

Do I always agree with him? Hell no. He liked Crash, and worse, he implied that most of the critics who didn't like Crash were racists. His tastes run towards the populist, and he tends not to care for anything unpleasant or bizarre unless he's specifically watching it with an eye towards brilliance.

I would say to skip his reviews of anything that gets two, two and a half, or three stars. Anything he's lukewarm about he will not describe interestingly. Read the Great Movies series, read his one and half star reviews, and be willing to understand that he's a person with tastes, and they won't always be the same as yours.


Oh, and then read some Pauline Kael. I love that woman.