Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Ebert gives Texas Chainsaw remake 0 stars
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Oni" data-source="post: 1183498" data-attributes="member: 380"><p>I know you've covered this, I read it the first time. If your going to quote someone you shouldn't hack up their sentences. </p><p></p><p>"This movie, strewn with blood, bones, rats, fetishes and severed limbs, photographed in murky darkness, scored with screams, wants to be a test: Can you sit through it?" </p><p></p><p>Thats not chiding it for violence, that's chiding it for being hard to sit through. Not once in his review of Texas Chainsaw Massacre did Ebert say it was too violent or bloody, only comment on the fact that those are present in the movie. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Kill Bill might very well be geeky, but I rather doubt that is what Ebert is talking about. Geek show, like a carnival sideshow where some inbred hick shoves chickens in his mouth and nails up his nose. Ebert's complaint with TCM doesn't lie with the blood and severed limbs, if that were the case I doubt his review of Kill Bill would have been much better, as he explained rather thoroughly it wasn't the elements, it was how they were used. Nice little straw man you set up at the end there. The fact that both draw from previous sources isn't what is at issue here, rather it's presentation. Your seeing hyprocisy here because you want to not because it exist. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You are, of course, entitled to your opinions and Ebert is, of course, entitled to his. Neither of them are particularly hypocritical which is what I was trying to get at. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Personally I think critics are a better barometer of such things and here is why. Critics opinions are based on having seen the movie. Box office numbers are different though. They're based on, in most cases, people that haven't seen the movie yet, they may have some idea what their getting into, but ultimately they don't know whether they're going to like it or not until they actually see it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Oni, post: 1183498, member: 380"] I know you've covered this, I read it the first time. If your going to quote someone you shouldn't hack up their sentences. "This movie, strewn with blood, bones, rats, fetishes and severed limbs, photographed in murky darkness, scored with screams, wants to be a test: Can you sit through it?" Thats not chiding it for violence, that's chiding it for being hard to sit through. Not once in his review of Texas Chainsaw Massacre did Ebert say it was too violent or bloody, only comment on the fact that those are present in the movie. Kill Bill might very well be geeky, but I rather doubt that is what Ebert is talking about. Geek show, like a carnival sideshow where some inbred hick shoves chickens in his mouth and nails up his nose. Ebert's complaint with TCM doesn't lie with the blood and severed limbs, if that were the case I doubt his review of Kill Bill would have been much better, as he explained rather thoroughly it wasn't the elements, it was how they were used. Nice little straw man you set up at the end there. The fact that both draw from previous sources isn't what is at issue here, rather it's presentation. Your seeing hyprocisy here because you want to not because it exist. You are, of course, entitled to your opinions and Ebert is, of course, entitled to his. Neither of them are particularly hypocritical which is what I was trying to get at. Personally I think critics are a better barometer of such things and here is why. Critics opinions are based on having seen the movie. Box office numbers are different though. They're based on, in most cases, people that haven't seen the movie yet, they may have some idea what their getting into, but ultimately they don't know whether they're going to like it or not until they actually see it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Ebert gives Texas Chainsaw remake 0 stars
Top