CBright7831 0 Report post Posted August 13, 2005 He dated the girl who portrayed Pat in the "It's Pat" skits?!?!? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
King Cucaracha 0 Report post Posted August 13, 2005 "...a film that was sadly overlooked at Oscar time because apparently nobody had the foresight to invent a category for Best Running Penis Joke Delivered by a Third-Rate Comic." OH TAG! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Fishyswa Report post Posted August 13, 2005 "I think the fact that Ebert doesn't really delve into speicifcs as to why this film is so bad is his way of saying "If you really need me to tell you that the new Rob Schneider movie sucks, then you should probobly just stop going to the movies and stay at home"." He's a movie reviewer, that's his job. If it's that bad why "review" it in the first place? If you plan on saying nothing that would help a movie goer, why even bother? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Masked Heel 0 Report post Posted August 13, 2005 Almost two pages of posts and not one of you have seen the movie to bitch about it if you didn't like the first Deuce don't watch the second cuz you won't like it, however if you liked the first one you'll laugh your ass off at Deuce 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
King Kamala 0 Report post Posted August 13, 2005 I don't think there are any Deuce fans in this thread, hence the bashing. I think Ebert's review is hillarious as someone who owns his book, I Hate Hate Hate This Movie (His compilation of reviews of bad movies). Its good to see a critic go off on a piece of shit Hollywood dreck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmy no nose 0 Report post Posted August 13, 2005 I don't know that it necessarily influenced the review, but since Ebert's review of the first movie they've had a sort of ongoing fued. Rob Schneider tends to take any sort of negative reactions really personally which I don't understand because I'm sure he's making good money and has a bunch of fans who don't care what they say. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted August 13, 2005 Rob Schiender was on the JiM rome show a couple of weeks ago... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I heard that interview, too. The thing with movie critics is that you have to read one's reviews for a number of movies and then determine their tastes. It's not like I'd expect Ebert to give this *** or ****... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuperJerk 0 Report post Posted August 14, 2005 A comedy doesn't need to be good, it just needs to be funny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Niggardly King 0 Report post Posted August 14, 2005 It served its purpose, just a funny movie that I went to see with a few friends. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted August 14, 2005 I have a feeling that this film will be getting a Razzie nomination. Then again, there's been quite a few bad movies this year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fökai 0 Report post Posted August 14, 2005 He's a movie reviewer, that's his job. If it's that bad why "review" it in the first place? If you plan on saying nothing that would help a movie goer, why even bother? I get your point, but is an Ebert review going to sway people from seeing this film? Even if he loved the movie, I still wouldn't see it. The fact that squashing a quasi-feud between Rob fucking Schneider and a critic whose claim to fame is an internet award, seemed more entertaining to Ebert to write about than bashing the film itself, is the point of this review. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toshiaki Koala 0 Report post Posted August 14, 2005 How is some pathetic "fued" between some obscure writer and the guy in the horrible movie more entertaining than the movie? That kind of logic made Paris Hilton a star. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Heh. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bobobrazil1984 0 Report post Posted August 15, 2005 Usually i have no use for Ebert, except when he loathes a movie. His "this movie is SHIT" reviews are usually some of the funniest around Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BUTT 0 Report post Posted August 15, 2005 How is some pathetic "fued" between some obscure writer and the guy in the horrible movie more entertaining than the movie? That kind of logic made Paris Hilton a star. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Heh. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I believe he's referring to Goldstein, not Ebert. Anyway, I always hated the title "Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo". Of course he's a male gigolo. You can't be a female gigolo! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toshiaki Koala 0 Report post Posted August 15, 2005 Oh. Well, color me retarded. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yuna_Firerose 0 Report post Posted August 15, 2005 "Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo". It kinda rhymes in a poetic, same-syllable way. Deuce and Male being one syllable; Bigalow and Gigolo being two. Deuce Bigalow: Gigolo seems too... awkward, purely in a title sense. Or maybe I've simply toyed with alliteration too much in my writing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites