babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » culture   » Roger Ebert Talks About Michael Moore and Much More

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Roger Ebert Talks About Michael Moore and Much More
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 24 April 2003 04:37 PM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
an interesting interview with the thumbs-up-thumbs down guy.

quote:
Q: What do you make of the criticism of Hollywood celebrities for speaking out against the war--the Sean Penns, the Susan Sarandons?

Ebert: It's just ignorant; it's just ignorant. I begin to feel like I was in the last generation of Americans who took a civics class. I begin to feel like most Americans don't understand the First Amendment, don't understand the idea of freedom of speech, and don't understand that it's the responsibility of the citizen to speak out ... You know, if you're good enough to be the best actor of your generation, which is probably what Sean Penn is, you're probably not dumb. And anyone who's ever heard Susan Sarandon speak for a while knows that she's pretty smart. I write op-ed columns for the Chicago Sun-Times, and people send me e-mails saying, "You're a movie critic. You don't know anything about politics." Well, you know what, I'm 60 years old, and I've been interested in politics since I was on my daddy's knee. During the 1948 election, we were praying for Truman. I know a lot about politics.



From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
kuba walda
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3134

posted 24 April 2003 04:49 PM      Profile for kuba walda        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thumbs UP except for

quote:
You know, if you're good enough to be the best actor of your generation, which is probably what Sean Penn

Sorry, never like Penn

And to add

quote:
There's an interesting pattern going on. When I write a political column for the
Chicago Sun-Times, when liberals disagree with me, they send in long, logical e-mails explaining all my errors. I hardly ever get well-reasoned articles from the right. People
just tell me to shut up. That's the message: "Shut up. Don't write anymore about this. Who do you think you are?"

I think that is so true. And you see it at peace rallies too. The right is war side just yells at us to shut up while we demonstrators can give reasons why we are out there. (Or at least I think so)

[ 24 April 2003: Message edited by: kuba walda ]


From: the garden | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 24 April 2003 05:18 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Never??? That's a bit harsh. Fast Times, Dead Man Walking, Sweet and Lowdown. He's a pretty good actor and a pretty good director too. The Crossing Guard was very powerful.
From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
kuba walda
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3134

posted 24 April 2003 05:23 PM      Profile for kuba walda        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The only role I liked him in of all those was Dead Man Walking... but it was the story I found enthralling, and I think there are others equally competent to play the role.

Never, harsh, non


From: the garden | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michael Hardner
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2595

posted 24 April 2003 07:24 PM      Profile for Michael Hardner   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
He's pretty close to the best, IMO.

Versatility. I loved him in 'Sweet and Lowdown'


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290

posted 24 April 2003 07:25 PM      Profile for Jimmy Brogan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ebert:

quote:
I think a lot of working class people don't understand that their money is being stolen. I saw an interesting article that said 10 percent of the American public would put themselves in the top 1 percent in income.

quote:
Yeah, they all think they're going to leave a big estate, and they love Bush's theories because they all think they're going to get rich someday. But the fact is, most people are not going to be rich someday. And we've had a concerted policy of taking money away from the poor and giving it to the rich wholesale, and at the same time, we have the runaway corporations, and the greed. Look at [Richard] Perle's resignation; look what's really behind that. I feel ordinary people really should be angry. Yet a lot of them seem to be voting conservative and thinking that the conservatives represent them. And they don't.

He should post on babble, with a handle like TheThumb.


From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hankerin' Tom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3945

posted 25 April 2003 12:23 AM      Profile for Hankerin' Tom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
A: the right accuses every lefist of not having well reasoned arguments.
B: having debated 3 marchers i can tell you that those who i talked with ( 1 girl with flyers, one guy with a bullhorn and one guy with Red China hat) had good reasons why they were there, but terrible reasons why they were protesting.
C: Free Speech is not something a citizen gives another nor can a citizen take away another's freedomof speech. It may not be curtailed by the government. Egbert seems to think that the First Ammendment protects one from repurcussions developed from their use and misuse of the freedom of speech. If that were true then Congressmen Trent Lot and Rick Santorum would never have gotten in trouble.
I can tell anyone to shut up as much as i like. If i owna business i can choose not to play Dixie Chick music or show Susan Sarandon movies. In neither case do i violate anyone's freedom of speech. if i were the government and i punished the Dixie Chicks or Tim Robbins then i would, indeed, be violatiing their Freedom of Speech.

D: If you guys want to read something from an intelligent movie critic try Michael Medved.


From: The Heartland | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 25 April 2003 12:42 AM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
He should post on babble, with a handle like TheThumb.

hey that reminds me that michael medved co-wrote this v.interesting book called "what really happened to the class of '65"


From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 25 April 2003 11:20 AM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Egbert seems to think that the First Ammendment protects one from repurcussions developed from their use and misuse of the freedom of speech. If that were true then Congressmen Trent Lot and Rick Santorum would never have gotten in trouble.
I can tell anyone to shut up as much as i like. If i owna business i can choose not to play Dixie Chick music or show Susan Sarandon movies. In neither case do i violate anyone's freedom of speech. if i were the government and i punished the Dixie Chicks or Tim Robbins then i would, indeed, be violatiing their Freedom of Speech.

I don't think that's what he meant at all. More likely he is addressing the fact that people like the Dixie Chicks have received death threats and been called traitors and terrorists. Because the average American hasn't taken a civics class and doesn't understand that you can ignore them if you don't like what they are say but death threats aren't acceptable. And also, slamming your President isn't treason. I think you are purposely missing Ebert's point. How very right of you.


From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 25 April 2003 11:40 AM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
If you guys want to read something from an intelligent movie critic try Michael Medved.

Thanks for consistently brightening my days with hilarity. Big belly laugh over this one.


From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 25 April 2003 12:44 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The funniest thing about Medved's website was this little factoid:

quote:
Michael's sister-in-law (and brother Jonathan's wife) was assistant director on the Tom Cruise teenage prostitution comedy, "Risky Business." She is now a full-time mother raising four children in Jerusalem

I don't know why. It just strikes me as really funny.


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 25 April 2003 01:48 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Why settle for Medved when the Childcare Action Project does it so much more scientifically...
From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
cynic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2857

posted 25 April 2003 07:57 PM      Profile for cynic     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
See, now you're all misusing your freedom of speech again. Don't make HT break out that bag full of shut-ups.
From: Calgary, unfortunately | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca