Would You Trust a Movie Review from Rush Limbaugh or Rachel Maddow?

[JollyRoger]

I think the Second (and the Constitution) was drafted, in large part, by lawyers, thus confirming VR's cryptic lawyerspeak point and undercutting his plain language point.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Maddow is rather intelligent and well read compared with the more low brow, jock shock Limbaugh. especially the last few years Limbaugh has gone extreme, with the slut and p0rn comments for example.

I prefer recommendations from Jon Steward or Stephen Colbert.

 

[Kyriakos]

By now i don't give much credence to movie reviews- and even less so when they are done by people who are so-called 'celebrities'. At least the other people are more likely to actually present the view they had of the movie, unlike those with one or several agendas.

It should be noted, though, that i rarely like any film. Last one i did like considerably was Spider (2002) with Ralph Fiennes and some other good actors, Gabriel Byrne and Miranda Richardson (the female protagonist in particular was very good in my view).

 

[Lord Baal]

Or any non-lawyer on the interpretation of the Constitution.

Or a Republican on democracy.

I'm still mourning Roger Ebert's death myself. His views and my own seemed to line up reasonably well. I think that's what you need in a reviewer, whether it is of films, games, or something else; find a reviewer who seems to like films you like and hate films you hate. Then you're likely to be steered towards enjoyable films and away from unenjoyable ones in future.

 

[Rashiminos]

If Rush Limbaugh did a review on the Last Supper, I'd watch it.

I'm wager there are some genres I'd take Rachel Maddow's advice on.

 

[BvBPL]

Is that what you were referring to in your OP? Non-controversial and non-political flicks like that?

I'm not sure if I would use the term non-political to encompass the kinds of movies I am talking about. Instead, I would talk about movies like District 9, Starship Troopers, and Elysium as movies with significant political messages that are not pieces of political cinema in the same why that Bowling for Columbine or Waiting for Superman are.

I mean, it is not interesting to hear Limbaugh and Maddow's takes on Waiting for Superman because if you know the premise of the movie and are familiar with the political bent of the broadcasters. Much more interesting is the commentators' takes on the underlying neo-fascism of Starship Troopers as a political commentary hidden in an action movie.

Which isn't to say I would be uninterested in their takes on something without a political undertone at all.

I think the Second (and the Constitution) was drafted, in large part, by lawyers, thus confirming VR's cryptic lawyerspeak point and undercutting his plain language point.

Don't forget the Freemasons.

 

[Camikaze]

I probably wouldn't trust a review by them, because I'd suspect an ulterior motive. I mean, what would these two people be doing reviewing a movie? Suddenly branching into a different field of entertainment because their current careers aren't panning out?

Naturally I'd be more inclined to trust something by Maddow, but even then I'd imagine what she'd write would really be about something other than the movie itself.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I'm not sure if I would use the term non-political to encompass the kinds of movies I am talking about. Instead, I would talk about movies like District 9, Starship Troopers, and Elysium as movies with significant political messages that are not pieces of political cinema in the same why that Bowling for Columbine or Waiting for Superman are.

Starship Troopers?

Robert Heinlein is even more of a far-right nutcase than Limbaugh is.

Besides, what comments has Limbaugh made about any of these flicks? You mentioned Forrest Gump. How exactly is that a movie with a "significant political message"?

 

[Gucumatz]

In most cases, probably not. They both annoy me whenever I hear them talk (of course Limbaugh is unbearable, but Maddow while I think better on a relative scale, is someone I disagree with far too often) - no reason I would want to hear their voices in my head when I read a review about a movie too.

 

[Goodfella]

Hannity blamed Atlas Shrug II's massive critical failure on liberal bias, but with politics aside, it was a plainly horrible movie. So, no, I don't trust political commentators to give me movie advice.

 

[Kyriakos]

^I don't know how the book is, but the movie 'Starship Troopers' was rather little more than a (somewhat enjoyable in that respect) gore-fest. The dialogue was incredibly dull and sloganesque. Not many of the scenes even made sense and one always expected the inevitable Earth#1 trope to cover everything up in a shallow grave

That movie makes 300 seem like high-brow art (anyway 300 is a better movie in all respects, in my view)