Thanks: 0
Results 1 to 12 of 12
-
11-24-2002, 03:34 PM #1Junior Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2001
- Location
- Nowheresville
- Posts
- 6
- Credits
- 1,065
Why is Dean Kish such a terrible reviewer?
I'm dead serious, he's just not good at all.
Take for example his review of Pearl Harbor :
"This American interpretation of the Japanese invasion is very respectful to the Japanese and doesn't show them as tyrants. I liked that the Japanese were perceived as doing a strategic thing and that they knew that they were awakening a sleeping giant. I am not sure if this is actually the correct portrayal of Japan during this time period but it definitely won't harm anybody today."
First of all, I had trouble finding any interpretation whatsoever. We're exposed to absolutely no background on the war or the Japanese involvment in it. Secondly, when Mr. Kish states that "it definitely won't harm anybody today," he's completely wrong. Godard said that the people who make movies write history. Well, that's true, and I'm sure the majority of people today don't want future generations believing that Pearl Harbor is an accurate portrayl.
Or how about his most recent review of Die Another Day:
"...the film opens with a thrilling hovercraft chase that pits our hero against a corrupt branch of the Korean army...This is definitely not my dad's James Bond.
(I'm inclined to conclude that Kish is somewhere between 10 and 13 years of age.)
A) It's actual North Korea. B) It's silly to refer to it as a corrupt branch of the army, because the entire government is corrupt to begin with and the writers/producers of the new Bond film simply don't want to spark any controversy.
I'm not exactly sure why the moderators of this site continue to let the Kish monoply of reviews reign, but for those of you out there who rely on Kish weekly, let me save you from yourselves:
http://www.suntimes.com/index/ebert.html
Dean Kish: (0 of 5) So Says the Soothsayer.
-
actually "Pearl Harbor" did SUCK..... i would give the same score ..
basically "Pearl Harbor" by Michael Bay, made it look like it was a Japanese surprise attack on an American Love triangle
btw ... Roger Ebert said that....Last edited by trailergod; 11-24-2002 at 03:45 PM.
-
Shoundent it be
"Why is Dean Kish such a terrible reviewer!"
not
"Why is Dean Kish such a terrible reviewer?"
anyway. anyone who takes a big hollywood movies as pure facts are in truble in the first place. And this one isent even about pearl harbor, its about the 3 ppl whos around when it happened.
anyway. Im pretty sure it did taught many ppl somehting. That US did bomb Japan early on.
anyway. I dont read his reviews often, so I cant really say if hes good or bad as a reviewer, but if this is all ur arguments, I cant really see your point.
anyway. Pearl Harbour isent a very good movie.
anyway. im done now."A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism." / Carl Sagan
-
Originally posted by Gaumont
Shoundent it be
"Why is Dean Kish such a terrible reviewer!"
not
"Why is Dean Kish such a terrible reviewer?"
(Don't mind me. I can be really picky when it comes to grammar and spelling and such.)
And I'll chime in with the same opinion as everyone else: Pearl Harbor sucked. It sucked really bad."Well, what if there is no tomorrow? There wasn't one today!"
-
Loved the fighter action in PH!
But yeah..... oerall... not a good movie./!\ Certified Bandwidth Abuser || ([)(]) Dolby Digital me bitch! || Alicia Keys || Game Trailers || FaceBook user ||
|| All-time Favourite TV Shows: Battlestar Galactica (2003+), Dead Like Me, FireFly, Invader ZIM, Space: Above & Beyond, Veronica Mars ||
[ -- Music Festival Whore! -- ]
-
umm.. who is this dean kish fellow anyway? just a member or he sends his reviews in? personally, i didn't find his reviews all that enlightening and so i don't usually (actually, never) read them anymore.
poor dean, hope he doesn't read this thread!
-
Re: Why is Dean Kish such a terrible reviewer?
Originally posted by Serpico
I'm not exactly sure why the moderators of this site continue to let the Kish monoply of reviews reign, but for those of you out there who rely on Kish weekly, let me save you from yourselves:
http://www.suntimes.com/index/ebert.html
Dean Kish: (0 of 5) So Says the Soothsayer.
Feardotcom? Thumbs up! Jackass the movie? Thumbs up! Ghostship? Thumbs up!
ok, i'm just kidding about those thumbs up, but i wish gene siskel were still around instead of ebert (or roeper).
-
Originally posted by impetigo
umm.. who is this dean kish fellow anyway? just a member or he sends his reviews in? personally, i didn't find his reviews all that enlightening and so i don't usually (actually, never) read them anymore.
poor dean, hope he doesn't read this thread!
dean kish is the movie reviewer in ML, he was also a reviewer at http://www.comingsoon.net/ , most of the time i read his reviews and they are ok, and somtimes they are not. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, even reviewers...
-
11-25-2002, 06:22 AM #9Trailer Fanatic
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- Equinox Reloaded
- Posts
- 337
- Credits
- 1,065
Originally posted by tisoy
dean kish is the movie reviewer in ML, he was also a reviewer at http://www.comingsoon.net/ , most of the time i read his reviews and they are ok, and somtimes they are not. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, even reviewers...
-
11-25-2002, 06:36 AM #10Trailer Fanatic
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- Equinox Reloaded
- Posts
- 337
- Credits
- 1,065
Re: Re: Why is Dean Kish such a terrible reviewer?
Originally posted by impetigo
i think ebert is kind of a senile old fool now. he likes the stupidest movies and these days there aren't many movies he DOESN'T like.
Feardotcom? Thumbs up! Jackass the movie? Thumbs up! Ghostship? Thumbs up!
ok, i'm just kidding about those thumbs up, but i wish gene siskel were still around instead of ebert (or roeper).
Read his review of The Truth About Charlie. Either he's gotten senile, or Universal Pictures is paying him off (either in cash or McDonald's cheeseburgers). But he reviews the film like Ronald Reagan answering a tough question from the media. He talks about more other films vaguely related (save Charade, which it is a remake of) to The Truth About Charlie, then gives Thandie Newton's filmography resume, then takes a paragraph to mention the events of the film, without giving any opinion of the film. At best, he don't take movies very seriously anymore. At worst, he is being paid off for reviews. This is disgusting - he is gone from Pulitzer Prize winner to schill. Since 1995, his opinion hasn't been worth crap (for example he praised John Carpenter's Ghosts of Mars, The Phantom Menace etc).
-
Re: Re: Re: Why is Dean Kish such a terrible reviewer?
Originally posted by Equinox
This is disgusting - he is gone from Pulitzer Prize winner to schill. Since 1995, his opinion hasn't been worth crap (for example he praised John Carpenter's Ghosts of Mars, The Phantom Menace etc).
and truth about charlie was a pretty shabby remake of charade (but it's hard to remake a classic.. but then, why bother at all?).
-
Movie Critic Dean Kish is back... this time in front of the camera!
http://www.youtube.com/user/themoviereviewtv
http://www.twitter.com/tmr_tv
Similar Threads
-
Just Say 'No' To Dean Kish
By Serpico in forum General Chatter - Movie RelatedReplies: 16Last Post: 06-25-2011, 03:18 AM -
Four Feathers, Red Dragon, The Ring, The Tuxedo reviews by Dean Kish
By trailergod in forum Movie NewsReplies: 4Last Post: 10-07-2002, 04:31 PM
Bookmarks