Quantcast

Roger Ebert Gives the Batman Colorado Massacre a Thumbs Down, “We’ve seen this Movie before”

brtndr 2012/07/22 16:51:49
Thumb

In another pathetic attempt by the media to merge reality with fantasy, Roger Ebert, who has dated CFR media queen Oprah Winfrey in the past, has recently published his review of the massacre in Aurora, Colorado during the screening of the latest Batman sequel, and gave the massacre a solid “Thumbs Down” review for lack of originality,

“Whenever a tragedy like this takes place, it is assigned catchphrases and theme music, and the same fragmentary TV footage of the shooter is cycled again and again.”~Roger Ebert~

So, according to Roger Ebert, the government scripted Colorado false flag massacre suffers from predictable dialog sequences, and bad scene editing. Sort of like a sequel to a typical comic book movie that’s absent of a complete 3 act structure where there's an Act I:The Setup, Act II: The Confrontation, and then finally ending with Act III: The Resolution. Apparently, Roger Ebert has never read the governments script of a false flag terror event called “Problem, Reaction, Solution”, and doesn’t realize that we’re now in Act II of that false flag script, with Act III coming very, very soon. Quick, someone fax Roger the governments false flag terror script, so he can re-edit his review of the Massacre in Colorado before it goes viral!

Also, Roger apparently doesn’t approve of a musical score either, that will inevitably accompany the coverage of the Colorado Massacre. Perhaps, Roger is suggesting here, that the mainstream media’s coverage should go more for the, low budget independent style of “Realism”, over the phony manufactured Hollywood style of “idealism”, like Dog Day Afternoon, or the Blair Witch Project for example.

Ebert continues his scathing review of the Colorado Massacre during the Batman sequel, by describing the media’s portrayal of the government latest manufactured false flag terrorists character, James Holmes, as a cheap rip-off of Travis Bickle from Martin Scorsese’s “Taxi Driver”, released by Columbia Pictures in 1976, and now available on DVD, which starred Robert DeNiro playing a far more original and artistically inspired version of a psychotic homicidal maniac than James Holmes could ever hope to be portrayed by our bankrupt mainstream corporate control media. Travis was a totally fictional character, who was in the military before becoming a Taxi driver, and could be described as someone screwed up by a type of mind control dysfunction. But I’m not going to go into the world of the crazy conspiracy theorists here, and I see no connection between the two. Now, moving on to an actual quote by Roger Ebert in his review.

“Somewhere in the night, among those watching, will be another angry, aggrieved loner who is uncoiling toward action. The cinematic prototype is Travis Bickle of “Taxi Driver.” I don’t know if James Holmes cared deeply about Batman. I suspect he cared deeply about seeing himself on the news. The cinematic prototype is Travis Bickle of “Taxi Driver.””

I hope you’re taking notes mainstream media? You haven’t heard directorial advice this good since James Lipton interviewed Sydney Lumet on “Inside The Actors Studio” years ago.

Also, included in Ebert’s review of the Colorado Massacre, is his review of the 2nd amendment. So readers are kind of getting a 2 for 1 double feature here. Unfortunately, for the 2nd amendment, Roger doesn’t like that either, and gives it a thumbs down as well with this review.

“Our gun laws are also insane, but many refuse to make the connection. The United States is one of few developed nations that accepts the notion of firearms in public hands. In theory, the citizenry needs to defend itself. Not a single person at the Aurora, Colo., theater shot back, but the theory will still be defended.”

OK, Roger, so you're saying that “citizenry needs to defend itself”, but because no one probably had any guns to shoot back with, therefore, we need more gun restrictions so the citizens can’t have a gun to shoot back with. Is it just me, or are you having as much trouble following Roger’s train of logic as I am?

I believe that Roger attempts to explain his baffling logic on the issue of the 2nd amendment with a personal antidote from his life experience, away from his daily grind of watching movies and critiquing them.

“I was sitting in a Chicago bar one night with my friend McHugh when a guy from down the street came in and let us see that he was packing heat.

“Why do you need to carry a gun?” McHugh asked him.

“I live in a dangerous neighborhood.”

“It would be safer if you moved.”

OOHH, SNAP!!! (Roger Ebert’s friend) you sure told that guy didn’t you. I wonder if Roger and his friend would have felt sorry for the guy packing heat, if he was later killed in a knife attack in his dangerous neighborhood, because he didn’t have a firearm to defend himself? Or, maybe the gun owner should’ve just moved to avoid being killed.

So far, I’ve only been able to identify the number of drinking buddies that Roger Ebert has to just one. Check back with this story for further updates on the number of Roger Ebert drinking buddies as they develop.

Read More: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/21/opinion/weve-see...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • NPC 2012/07/22 16:53:44
    NPC
    +3
    Allow the innocent persons involved to have some peace. The faster that this subject disappears the better off we will all be.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Beccy 2012/07/22 20:02:44
    Beccy
    +2
    I think it's really sad that these people were killed. Something about this story just doesn't ring true. This man was a med student why would he take a chance of giving up his profession. He went in the theater in full riot gear with a rifle. How in god's name did that happen. Yes the media is calling for our guns.
  • mk, Smartass Oracle 2012/07/22 19:04:13
  • Tennessee3501 2012/07/22 18:54:36
    Tennessee3501
    +1
    Roger should know that we have never seen Anne Hathaway as Catwoman before. That alone is worth the price of admission! That alone will keep us all entertained for 3 hours. I thought the film was great. I have disagreed with Roger before, but I do respect him for being one of the early reviewers to recognize the acting talent of Melissa Leo who finally won an Oscar for her supporting rile in "The Fighter." Christian Bale won his Oscar for his supporting role in the same film.
  • brtndr Tenness... 2012/07/22 20:00:12
    brtndr
    +1
    LOL!! I think you would be a better movie critic than Roger Ebert. You should start your own movie review column. I would subscribe.
  • Tenness... brtndr 2012/07/22 22:54:15
    Tennessee3501
    Why thank you! On a more serious note, I thought the movie was great! Yes, we have seen it before, but either Roger or his late partner Gene Siskel used to complain that all of the Clint Eastwood "Dirty Harry" movies were the same. The other would reply, yes, but they are classics, so everybody should go see them all, not just the latest one!
  • NPC 2012/07/22 16:53:44
    NPC
    +3
    Allow the innocent persons involved to have some peace. The faster that this subject disappears the better off we will all be.
  • Meako NPC 2012/07/22 18:13:30
    Meako
    +2
    I agree...

    candle
  • Pat NPC 2012/07/22 19:19:24
    Pat
    I agree that the victims and their loved ones should be left alone to grieve and to try to find some peace in all of this horror.
    But, just making this problem "disappear" isn't any kind of solution. I'm not even sure there is a solution.
    We do have an obsession in this country about the right to bear arms. I have no problem with someone owning a gun for personal protection of their home and family and I certainly have no objection to hunters having a rifle for their sport or target practice.
    I do have a problem with these rapid fire automatic weapons that use the quick loading, gun clips that allow people to fire off multiple rounds and quickly re-load. I don't see any need for those kind of weapons to be in the hands of the average citizen. They are more suited to the military.
    Now there are some people that seem to feel the need to have these kind of weapons in case the government comes after us (the citizens) for some reason. Personally, I think that scenario is kind of far fetched. Even if that happened, there is no way that any civilian militia is going to defeat an army that has cannons, rockets and thousands of soldiers.
    So it makes sense to me that these kind of weapons not be available for purchase by the public.
    Also, this latest shooter bought over 6,000 rounds ...

    I agree that the victims and their loved ones should be left alone to grieve and to try to find some peace in all of this horror.
    But, just making this problem "disappear" isn't any kind of solution. I'm not even sure there is a solution.
    We do have an obsession in this country about the right to bear arms. I have no problem with someone owning a gun for personal protection of their home and family and I certainly have no objection to hunters having a rifle for their sport or target practice.
    I do have a problem with these rapid fire automatic weapons that use the quick loading, gun clips that allow people to fire off multiple rounds and quickly re-load. I don't see any need for those kind of weapons to be in the hands of the average citizen. They are more suited to the military.
    Now there are some people that seem to feel the need to have these kind of weapons in case the government comes after us (the citizens) for some reason. Personally, I think that scenario is kind of far fetched. Even if that happened, there is no way that any civilian militia is going to defeat an army that has cannons, rockets and thousands of soldiers.
    So it makes sense to me that these kind of weapons not be available for purchase by the public.
    Also, this latest shooter bought over 6,000 rounds in a short time. Why is no one monitoring that kind of huge purchase by a single individual?
    I know I'll take some flack from all the gun owners but I want them to remember that I'm not against owning a gun. It's the high powered, rapid fire, rapid re-loading ones that I believe are only meant for a war situation and that doesn't exist now and I don't see it in the near future either.
    We've got to do something to stop these mass murders from happening again and again.
    (more)
  • Beccy Pat 2012/07/22 20:06:09
    Beccy
    +1
    We are shocked when people suffer from acts of violence here and I mourn their deaths but we are dropping bombs on inocent women and children so the Karma will come back.
  • Pat Beccy 2012/07/22 22:10:07
    Pat
    +1
    Good point.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/20 18:05:25

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals