1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

Ebert in cahoots with Blockbuster?!!...no, derision of BB, part II

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Peter Kim, Feb 12, 2002.

  1. Peter Kim

    Peter Kim Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,577
    Likes Received:
    0
    From Ebert's Sun-Times Answer Man column:

     
  2. TonyD

    TonyD Who do we think I am?

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 1999
    Messages:
    16,851
    Likes Received:
    280
    Location:
    Disney World and Universal Florida
    Real Name:
    Tony D.
    your header is confusing obviously ebert was trying to show "one" of the founders of BB the benifits of widescreen.not thee founder. maybe the person was simply a friend of ebert's.

    "Contemptuous or jeering laughter; ridicule.

    A state of being derided: The proposal was held in derision by members of the board.

    An object of ridicule; a laughingstock."

    that is the definition of derision so are you trying to continue to ridicule BB. are you saying ebert's not in cahoots with blockbuster?

    sorry it's not easy for me to figure things out sometimes.
     
  3. Peter Kim

    Peter Kim Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,577
    Likes Received:
    0
    The tone of header was meant to be sarcastic. The addendum, "...no, derision of BB, part II" was meant to clear this up. After reading Ebert for the last 15-20 years, I've always known Ebert to be the champion of film and the antagonist of manipulators. In this case, P & S and all those who propagate this format.

    The tone of Ebert's answer was one of derision. He has ridiculed BB in the past, and anyone else who supports P&S.
     
  4. Adam_WM

    Adam_WM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    1,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where on the Die Hard DVD is the comparison example?
     
  5. Scott Shanks

    Scott Shanks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2001
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Louisville, Ky
    Real Name:
    Scott Shanks
     
  6. Adam_WM

    Adam_WM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    1,630
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  7. Scott Merryfield

    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    11,446
    Likes Received:
    651
    Location:
    Michigan
     
  8. Wayne McRae

    Wayne McRae Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2000
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's John Belushi,from Animal House.He just failed history[​IMG]
     
  9. bill lopez

    bill lopez Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 1999
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seems we lost the WONKA war. Yes we got the petition to get the widescreen, but when it came to buying the widescreen we didn't produce. I didn't see the widescreen Wonka hit the Top 10 sales chart. And now one movie studio is re-releaseing widescreen dvds in Pan&Scan.
     
  10. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden Well-Known Member
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2001
    Messages:
    6,158
    Likes Received:
    61
    Location:
    Livonia, MI USA
    Real Name:
    Kenneth McAlinden
     
  11. Dick

    Dick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 1999
    Messages:
    4,901
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Real Name:
    Rick
    Bill - the cards were stacked against us with WW. The full screen edition hit the market many weeks before the widescreen version, so the latter was not on the shelves at all while all the impulse buyers and new release buyers and those buying to satisfy their children's demands were out there plunking down their twenty bucks. Further, even discount chains that generally carry widescreen editions stocked up on what was available - the full screen edition. Timing does make a difference, and I think Warner Bros understands this, otherwise the up-coming WATERSHIP DOWN (while not really a kid film) would probably be pan and scan.
     
  12. Kyle McKnight

    Kyle McKnight Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Messages:
    2,515
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nice misleading header...
     
  13. Peter Kim

    Peter Kim Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,577
    Likes Received:
    0
    Kyle, are you reading and understanding the header? Or at least reflect on it for more than a second? Obviously, by the way you wrote your last comment, you seem to understand the concept of sarcasm and derision. Apparently, nuance is lost here.

    If you're saying I baited you into reading this thread, which I think you are, that's untrue. I can see your attempt at nuance - thanks for levelling the insinuation against me.
     
  14. streeter

    streeter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2001
    Messages:
    1,396
    Likes Received:
    1
    Roger Ebert is obviously not happy at all with Blockbuster... but his co-host Richard Roeper is. There are "Richard Roeper recommends..." shelfliners at Blockbuster stores.
     
  15. Frank_W

    Frank_W Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  16. Brian_J

    Brian_J Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2001
    Messages:
    421
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  17. Peter Kim

    Peter Kim Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,577
    Likes Received:
    0
    Has there been a final outcome on the petition against BB's corporate policy of P&S only when dual formats released?
     
  18. Adam_WM

    Adam_WM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    1,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    My apologies for missing the Germans joke. Haven't seen Animal House all the way through. It's on the "to-do" list.
     
  19. Sean Moon

    Sean Moon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2001
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    0
    On the subject, yet off at the same time, this is another great quote from Ebert on the same answer man

    Q. I recently rented the film ''Bully'' by Larry Clark, and was played for a fool. On the box it was given an R rating, even though I knew it had been rated NC-17. Yet there was no disclaimer on the box stating that it had been altered from the original. I went home to watch it and sure enough before the movie began there was a title screen explaining that the version I had rented was not the version the director intended to be seen! I was unable to return the film for a refund--nor would anyone else who made the same mistake! How could they market this film without a written disclaimer stating it had been altered, and why can't they carry the original ''Director's Cut'' as well?

    Kevin Young, Whitman, Mass.

    A. You did not name the video store. If it was Blockbuster, the chain refuses to handle NC-17 movies, insisting that R-rated versions be supplied. Blockbuster thus dictates both format and content. Imagine the outcry if a book store stocked only the Reader's Digest Condensed Book versions of a novel, and quietly removed all the offensive parts.

    I love his response to that.
     
  20. Seth Paxton

    Seth Paxton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 1998
    Messages:
    7,588
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just want to acknowledge Ken's great follow up post.
    The Belushi line is great, but using that follow up line is classic after all the confusion especially.
    If only Adam had just said "Germans?" [​IMG]
     

Share This Page