http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19910322/REVIEWS/103220302/1023
the early 90's were drab times? ha. He also goes on to say that the turtles were originated in a nintendo game and whines about how superman and wonder woman were cooler. I like Ebert and I thought the secret of the ooze was subpar, but this review is a travesty.
He's crazy. He also believes the battles in the Star Trek II weren't good.
Film recommendation>>http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085542/
Interesting that he seems to think that the only way to differentiate the four Turtles is by the weapons. What a dumbass! Did he not notice the rather differently-coloured face-masks (red for Raphael, blue for Leonardo, purple for Donatello and orange for Michelangelo)? Maybe he should be ridiculed for noticing the violent weapons...
sharePlease have the time roger ebert doesen't no what he is talking about
share[deleted]
Way to counter ignorance with ignorance, bro.
---
Very good, Louis. Short, but pointless.
One disturbing thing about the turtles is that they look essentially the same. All that differentiates them, in the Nintendo game that gave them birth, is their weapons.
It's as if the whole sum of a character's personality is expressed by the way he does violence. The turtles are an example of the hazards of individuality.
They hang out together, act together, fight together, and have a dim collective IQ that expresses itself in phrases like "Cowabunga, dude." This is the way insecure teenage boys sometimes talk in a group, as a way of creating solidarity, masking fears of inadequacy, and forming a collective personality that is stupider than any individual member of it. The way you attain status in the group is by using violence to defend it against outsiders. People raised on these principles run a risk of starring in videotapes of police brutality.
I liked the older superheroes better. The ones that stood out from a crowd, had their own opinions, were not afraid of ridicule, and symbolized a future of truth and justice. Spiderman and Superman represented democratic values. Today's kids are learning from the Turtles that the world is a sinkhole of radioactive waste, that it's more reassuring to huddle together in sewers than take your chances competing at street level, and that individuality is dangerous. Cowabunga.
A recent national survey reported that 95 percent of grade school teachers could trace aggressive, antisocial classroom behavior to the Ninja Turtles
Ebert's an idiot because he wrote how he hated the turtles. He didn't even review the movie. He just said, "oh the turtles are in it with April and Keno, and uh Splinter. Utter idiocy!
shareOf course this is the guy whose favorite movie is a franchise cash-in which had next to nothing in common with its series (Herbie Goes Bananas), so how can you take him seriously?
shareI *love* Ebert, but he can be a *total* dick.
I think this review is Ebert Dickery at its finest.
He barely even bothered to review the first one. The most charitable things he said about it were backhanded compliments. Most of his review was taken up by moaning about the saturation of the TMNT, not commenting on the craft of the actual film: the performances, screenplay, photography, editing, music... y'know, all the things a FILM critic is meant to be appreciative of and comment on. It seems like he took all that to the next level for the sequel. Oh, well.
But like I said, I still love Ebert. He's honest, witty and usually has a good insight or two. I love his reviews for Sofia Coppola's films, for example. Give it up for the 'Bert!
I can't believe I'm posting on a Turtles board, but I agree with most of you. Ebert can sometimes be an idiot. The identification by weapons argument is idiotic because the point of it being four turtles is that all of them have different personalities.
Now here is what the real greatest American critic Jonathan Rosenbaum (whom people misunderstand as an academic snob) has to say about the movies:
" Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Capsule by Jonathan Rosenbaum
From the Chicago Reader
The delightful offspring of a marriage made in heaven--Hong Kong's Golden Harvest Films and Jim Henson's Muppetry--is this live-action romp based on Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird's comic-book characters, scripted by Todd W. Langen and Bobby Herbeck (with a goofy wit that suggests pseudonymous contributions to the dialogue by Thomas Pynchon), and directed with skill and assurance by Steve Barron. The plot involves a TV investigative reporter (Judith Hoag), a rise in thievery in Manhattan occasioned by a teenage gang known as the Foot (masterminded and exploited by a ninja villain called the Shredder), and the noble adversaries of the thieves--four teenage turtles and their rat ninja master who dwell in the sewer system, grown to abnormal size through exposure to radioactivity. Also involved is the reporter's son (Michael Turney), split between no less than three rival father figures, and an independent vigilante (Elias Koteas) who joins the turtles. The results are high-spirited martial arts and comedy, with heavy doses of Star Wars and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and music by M.C. Hammer, Johnny Kemp, Hi Tek 3, and Orchestra on the Half Shell (1990). "
and reasonably less entusiastic but not as unfair as Ebert's review:
" Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Secret of the Ooze
Capsule by Jonathan Rosenbaum
From the Chicago Reader
It might make an interesting study to determine why the only martial-arts movies to make major inroads in the American market are those with Muppet spin-offs as heroes. While pondering this question, one can have a reasonably amusing time with this predictable sequel, which is a bit longer on action and shorter on wit and character than the original (hence less good, in my opinion), but still diverting and harmless enough. Although the cast and director are different this time--Paige Turco now plays April O'Neil, TV reporter and den mother to the turtles, and Michael Pressman is the director--Todd W. Langen, who collaborated on the script of the original, supplies the same sort of teen patter, and the late Jim Henson's creature shop is back to provide a couple of drooling beasties. With David Warner and Ernie Reyes Jr. "
~~~~~~
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
he went to far.. i get the feeling reading his review that he didn't even watch the movie.
he acts as if the turtles promote bad values, how exactly? from his review if you hadn't seen the movie you might think the turtles are out stealing car radios and snatching purses from old ladies. in the movie however they show great comradery and concern for each other, as well as respect and concern for their master - is this a bad thing?
extremely careless review as he sheds an unnecessarily bad light on the franchise, and so poorly researched that he assumes the characters originated from a video game which in reality was preceded by a cartoon and then a comic book before that.
i get the feeling he was either really pissed off the day he wrote the review or otherwise had an interest to do the franchise harm.
[deleted]
Just bringing this thread back up:
Now here is what the real greatest American critic Jonathan Rosenbaum (whom people misunderstand as an academic snob) has to say about the movies:
" Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Capsule by Jonathan Rosenbaum
From the Chicago Reader
The delightful offspring of a marriage made in heaven--Hong Kong's Golden Harvest Films and Jim Henson's Muppetry--is this live-action romp based on Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird's comic-book characters, scripted by Todd W. Langen and Bobby Herbeck (with a goofy wit that suggests pseudonymous contributions to the dialogue by Thomas Pynchon), and directed with skill and assurance by Steve Barron. The plot involves a TV investigative reporter (Judith Hoag), a rise in thievery in Manhattan occasioned by a teenage gang known as the Foot (masterminded and exploited by a ninja villain called the Shredder), and the noble adversaries of the thieves--four teenage turtles and their rat ninja master who dwell in the sewer system, grown to abnormal size through exposure to radioactivity. Also involved is the reporter's son (Michael Turney), split between no less than three rival father figures, and an independent vigilante (Elias Koteas) who joins the turtles. The results are high-spirited martial arts and comedy, with heavy doses of Star Wars and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and music by M.C. Hammer, Johnny Kemp, Hi Tek 3, and Orchestra on the Half Shell (1990). "
After reading Ebert's review, I lost a lot of respect for the man. Turtles II wasn't the best film mind you, but when I was 6 years old watching it, it was the greatest thing in the world. I understand that they made it a little more goofy and kid friendly, but it in now way deserves the scathing review of Ebert. Case and point, he thought that they originated in video games. that throws his whole basis of judgment out the window. Nextr time he should maybe do a little research before tearing apart a movie obviously meant for children.
share[deleted]
lol seriouly Ebert was a kid like 80 years ago
share[deleted]
I just watched the movie again for the first time in years. After seeing the way Transformers recently was able to take a stab at revamping that part of my childhood into a semi-serious movie you have to admit that these films are fighting two audiences: people who don't know the material and people who don't want it touched/changed. The turtles series has a complicated history, so which one is the "correct" one? Eastman and Laird wrote some really good material that was pretty dark at times. The Cartoons were a blend of their concepts that managed to tone it down for an audience that would play with the toys. Then there's the Archie Comics which started out as a cartoon offshoot then grew in it's own direction and got deeper (even asking the question of romantic relationships and where they would end up in 50 years). The first film was very influenced by the Eastman and Laird comics, this one steals ideas from them and the cartoon: TGRI is a lot like the front for the Krang Brain creatures in their comics, Tokka is a lot like Slash from the cartoon.
When people review a film, I wonder how much time they actually spend researching the subject of the film. A lot of these "kids" films that get produced have source material that has been reinvented and reworked so much that you could study it for years. For that matter, DO they even watch the films? I doubt it sometimes-- I know way to many people who make snap decisions about films without ever seeing them already so who is to say that the critics are any different?
He loved the Transformers movie. He gave it three stars and says he would have given it 4 if it weren't for the too-long climatic fight scene. Maybe if the Turtles movies were PG-13, he would have given them a fair review.
Another he didn't seem to give a fair review was An American Tale. That movie freaked me out as a kid and haven't even watched it in adulthood, but I feel that he should have rated it based on quality (which most critics say it has) rather than on the fact that it'll freak out a whole lot of kids.
I have no taste, but that just means there's less of a chance that I'll get eaten
there is a difference and not just in masks ,or in weapons ,but in personality
Leonardo - the leader of the team
Michelangelo - the showoff smart ass party dude of the team
Donatello - the smarts of the team, the tech guy
Raphael - the black sheep, the angry kind of a jerk guy of the team
But those differences make the team. Everyone of them has a special quality.
Leonardo- his good instincts
Donatello- his knowledge
Raphael- his strength
Michelangelo- his thirst for action
And when they really need it they always can depend on another! and that counts for Raphael, too! Though he's the 'black sheep', like many people think. But stubbornness is sexy!!!!!
I've only been in one fight in my whole life,in 7th grade, yet everyone thinks I'm a maniac
[deleted]
You notice that he didn't review the film, he just bitched about how kids are being cheated in having their heroes as the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? I've noticed a lot of critics do that, they don't actually review the movie, thye just give it a score and take up space (read Entertainment Weeklys' review for Dar Water (which sucks)).
shareEbert is a waste of time. I've read so many of his bogus reviews, I've actually lost count. His opinions are almost universally worthless - talk about missing the point!!
squeezed and pulled and hurt my neck in 1988
I've never liked Ebert, for a couple reasons:
1. He's a pompous, arrogant windbag.
2. As a fan of Adam Sandler, I hate the way Ebert always trashes his movies.
Actually, going along with that, I think it's pretty ridiculous that they'd have someone like Ebert reviewing movies which clearly weren't made with guys like him intended as the target audience, such as Sandler's movies. Instead of having a show with two old guys reviewing movies, they should have a show where movies are reviewed by a small group of people (Say, 6-10 people) of all ages and ethnicities who could each give their opinions on a film.
Hey Ebert? Remember when kids were jumping out of windows with a towel strapped to their back? back in the stone age when you were young?????
Ebert and Roper are 2 dumba$$ $hitheads who wouldn't know a good movie if it bit them in their pu$$ys.
They have know idea what good movies truly are hence their idiotic movie reviews.
[deleted]
I like Ebert and I often agree with him. But I think he judges too many movies based on whether or not they agree with his own personal world view and not the quality of the film. He admitted Videodrome and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre were expertly made movies, yet gave them poor rating because he didn't like their worldview. And since he doesn't like the version of superheroes the TMNT present, he gave it a poor review as well. I don't like TMNT 2, but he should review it based on quality not on personal taste. He's meant to write reviews and criticism of the film so we'll know if it's good or not. A review isn't an essay on whether he agrees with the movie or not.
shareHow come everybody jumps down Eberts throat as soon as he give a bad review for a loved movie, but when a hyped movie gets a good review from him whats the first thing to happen? The boards get flooded with "EBERT LOVED IT!" threads...
I love Ebert. Like all critics I've scratched my head over many of his reviews. I've downtright been confused by some. But he is still one of the more fair and less snooty critics out there. The only thing he was snooty about was the slasher craze. Something I hold dear to my heart. At least he wasn't like Siskel. A guy who only praise obvious Oscar bait.
Ebert is actually one of the more fair critics out there, and as soon as he trashes a film that other people like, people are just all over him. I don't get it.
And by the way, TMNT II did suck. Even as a twelve year old, I knew that.