Ebert's review

[Jedi X]

actually, elfin is used quite a bit in archaic works. its not actually incorrect at all. but elven is the more popular usage.

anyway, ebert always has been a retard. i remember when he and siskel reviewed the animated lotr (the ones with all of the funky animation, like, not the japanese one but that other one- the one that just ended in the middle of the story. i never could believe that. i mean, you go through all this trouble to animate this story- and then you just stop half way?! why? does that make any sense to anyone? not me. just think about [Jedi X goes on for a good bit about this lack of closure: it seems to have had a profound effect on him, yet we will spare you his soliliquy- ED.] So they both, siskel and ebert, are talking about what a deep story it was and all that jazz, and now he is saying this. i mean, its like, make up your mind.

he says that the story doesn't have anything to do with our world, and life in general? huh? are you reading the same book as me, or are you just incapable of comprehending allegoric storytelling? who knows. i think all of those ju-ju babies have clogged his brain-pan.

i wont eve comment on the rest of his foolishness. he's just one of those guys "oh, look how cool i am, my favorite movies no one ever saw- thats because i got artistic integrity, i'm so deep". please, you not artistic- and you got no integrity. spare me your glory hogging, ebert. your just a fat man with too much time on his hands.

hey. did i see someone say something about gladiator? how can you find fault with that movie? we dont care about the roman empire? no kidding. its called "gladiator", not "rome". anyway, maximus is embodying all of the good qualities of rome, versus the corrupt embodiment of rome. so, caring about what happens to maximus IS caring about what happens to rome. they are one and the same.