July 18, 2007

Being Gay Has Never Been This Gay

Filed under: Film,Politics — acepundit @ 12:49 am

See if you can read this synopsis of “I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry” without gagging:

Chuck Levine and Larry Valentine are the pride of their fire station: two guy’s guys always side-by-side and willing to do anything for each other. Grateful Chuck owes Larry for saving his life in a fire, and Larry calls in that favor big time when civic red tape prevents him from naming his own two kids as his life insurance beneficiaries. But when an overzealous, spot-checking bureaucrat becomes suspicious, the new couple’s arrangement becomes a citywide issue and goes from confidential to front-page news. Forced to improvise as love-struck newlyweds, Chuck and Larry must now fumble through a hilarious charade of domestic bliss under one roof. After surviving their mandatory honeymoon and dodging the threat of exposure, the well-intentioned con men discover that sticking together in your time of need is what truly makes a family.

Oh how visible the thought process of the writers (it took three!) who formulated this two-hour lighthearted fagfest is. Take two extremely masculine men (firefighters of course) who probably drink beer for breakfast and then force them into playing homosexuals in a series of endless gags where they must pretend to be grossed out by the sight of “icky” breasts because, of course, they’re gay. All because there is no way to name your kids next of kin other than entering into a domestic partnership.

Uh oh, is that Kevin James as Larry trying to buy tampons because, he’s gay? Comedy gold!

No points for guessing that the “lawyer” played by Jessica Biel who by chance has just broken up with her boyfriend and has no qualms with stripping in front of her clients (I guess it’s ok when it’s a gay client) will learn the “truth” about Chuck and Larry’s pseudo gayness and hook up with Sandler’s character, Chuck, in the end after he learns the true meaning of being a homo.

It’s a Happy Madison production, so of course Rob Schneider found work this year. From the previews I learned that he plays (I believe) an Asian wedding coordinator who presides over Chuck and Larry’s Jewish wedding. Can gays get married in a Jewish ceremony? I don’t know, and I wouldn’t rely on this film for accurate information on Judaism, gays, or Jewish guys pretending to be gay.

There will nevertheless be a positive pro-gay message somewhere at the end of the film, so Hollywood can say it respects homosexuality while at the same time profiting and making fun of it for two hours.


June 21, 2007

Richard Roeper Responds to my Criticism

Filed under: Democrats,Film,Interesting News,Politics,Republicans — acepundit @ 2:39 pm

Yesterday Chicago Sun-Times columnist Richard Roeper or, according to Homer Simpson, Roger Ebert’s “kiss-ass new partner,” replied to my criticism of his column that implied Fox News has been “slanting” coverage of Michael Moore’s new documentary, “Sicko.” He was referring to comments made by conservative talk-show host Sean Hannity, but blamed the network despite its in-house movie critic giving the film a fawning review. From Roeper’s e-mail:

i don’t write the headlines. and of course roger friedman’s entertainment columns are quite different from the commentaries of hannity and o’reilly.

incidentally, i’ve been on fox news shows dozens of times, and i’ll continue to appear. as i’ve written in the past, they’ve always treated me fairly and professionally.

all the best,
richard roeper

Apparently my experience as a middle school yearbook editor didn’t teach me everything there is to know about journalism as I was completely unaware that columnists don’t write their own headlines. But even if I do concede that point to Roeper it doesn’t change the fact that he explicitly wrote, “To the surprise of no one, Fox News has been attacking Moore’s latest” when Roger Friedman’s glowing review eclipses whatever quip Sean Hannity made about the divisive filmmaker and his controversial documentary.

An interesting observation about the e-mail format that I just have to point out is the all-lowercase structure. It suggests Roeper’s playing the hip non-elitist who’s just a step steps above “IDK my BFF Jill” text messaging. Or, perhaps it’s just a quicker way to respond to his flooded e-mail inbox, but I prefer to think the former.

June 20, 2007

Richard Roeper Wants Scooter Libby Pardoned!

Filed under: Democrats,Elections,Film,Politics — acepundit @ 2:12 pm

His readers must be shocked. How could liberal pop-columnist and movie critic Richard Roeper call for the presidential pardon of Scooter Libby? It’s true, the Chicago Sun-Times, the newspaper for which Roeper writes, officially stated its position in an eye-opening column last Monday.

To be fair, it was actually conservative columnist Robert Novak who called for the pardon in his June 11th column, but doesn’t one person’s opinion on a topic become that company’s official position? It does according Roeper’s school of thought.

Over the last several years liberals have made it a sport to hysterically attack Fox News so they don’t have to explain why it’s the highest rated and most-watched cable news network. It’s just easier to denounce it as a propaganda outfit…a very, very successful propaganda outfit.

Faithfully doing his part, Roper titled his most recent column, “Fox’s slant on Moore enough to make you ill” but points to an entirely different culprit:

To the surprise of no one, Fox News has been attacking Moore’s latest (documentary).

Last Sunday night, Sean Hannity sounded as if he was ready to hand Moore a blindfold and a cigarette.

Is Roeper talking about Sean Hannity or Fox News here? I’m confused because I just read Fox’s review of the supposedly “brilliant and uplifting” documentary and I’m having trouble finding all the attacks. Nowhere in the review does it indicate that Fox movie-critic Roger Friedman is ready to give Moore “a blindfold and a cigarette.” If anything Friedman is looking to give Moore an Oscar statue.

By making Sean Hannity the official spokesperson for Fox News, Roeper made about as much sense as I did when I wrote that he was calling for the pardon of Scooter Libby based on a Robert Novak column.

So blinded and disgruntled liberals are by their hatred for a news network that is infinitely better and more popular than anything their media personalities have ever been able to create that they stubbornly refuse to accept Fox’s reaching hand.

I’m still amazed by how stupid the Democratic presidential hopefuls were when they refused to appear in a debate sponsored by Fox News and potentially tap into a voter pool that could easily determine the outcome of the next election.

Sure, they won’t get their ideas out to the independents who watch Fox News (or the part of its audience that justifies Roger Friedman’s paycheck), but at least they pleased the Keith Olbermann fan club and nuts who were going to vote for them anyway and haven’t put a Democrat in the Whitehouse since they kept Bill Clinton in 1996 with less than 50% of the popular vote.

It was the last time a Democrat won, and right when Fox News was in its infancy. Is it powerful enough to shape elections? Who knows, but the Left is certainly doing themselves no favors by refusing to work with a machine that isn’t going away anytime soon, no matter how many Roeper columns are written to denounce it.

June 10, 2007

How to Manipulate Abortion Survey Results

Filed under: Abortion,Film,Politics — acepundit @ 3:09 pm

The liberal-leaning online magazine Slate ran a story last Friday on the surprise controversy of the movie “Knocked Up,” a film about a girl who unintentionally gets pregnant but keeps the child because there isn’t another option in Hollywood – whereas in the real world she almost certainly would have opted for an abortion.

The author mentions (without citation) that a whopping 77% of Americans favor abortion and suggests the heroine of the film wouldn’t be such a bad guy if she went through the procedure, especially with that 77% behind her.

Then the New York Times ran a similar piece today citing a NYT/CBS News Poll saying “three-fourths of Americans favor access to abortion, though about half of those would like to see more restrictions than now.”

And there’s the rub. Assuming Slate used the same poll, it’s evident that abortion supporters ignore the part about the majority of Americans favoring restrictions.

The poll asked the question this way:

“Which of these comes closest to your view? Abortion should be generally available to those who want it. OR, Abortion should be available, but under stricter limits than it is now. OR, Abortion should not be permitted.”

The results tell a different story than what pro-choicers tells us. According to the survey, 39% of Americans believe abortion should be “generally available.” Yet almost as many, 37%, believe the limits we have now on abortion should be stricter. Finally, 21% are firmly against the procedure.

From those figures, a majority of Americans (58%) believe that either abortion should be outright illegal or at the very least harder to access. The survey doesn’t ask what restrictions the majority of Americans favor, but one that’s quite popular is restricting abortion unless needed to save the life of the woman.

Sorry Slate, but even if the restrictions didn’t go that far, I don’t think the majority of Americans would be happy with the film’s protagonist getting an abortion simply because she got “knocked up.”

June 8, 2007

Coming Back

Filed under: Film — acepundit @ 9:54 am

Roger Ebert’s ongoing cancer treatment has kept him out of the movie game for awhile but he’s making a slow comeback, reviewing about one new film per week. He didn’t care much for “Ocean’s Thirteen,” and in one of his patented digressions he’s reminded of something entirely different:

I am reminded of that IMAX documentary about climbing Mt. Everest. All I could think of was, if it’s hard for the climbers, think about how hard it is for the guys carrying the big IMAX camera up the mountain. I wanted to see a doc about them.

Ebert’s wit was missed last year.

June 3, 2007

Any Partisans Like ‘Knocked Up’?

Filed under: Abortion,Film — acepundit @ 8:47 pm

I’ve yet to see the film but I’m meaning to. I used to review them on my Aggressive-Voice site but careers and things that made me money got in the way. As I expected by the title alone, a bunch of righteous conservatives who haven’t even seen the film will dismiss it as Gina Dalfonzo has despite her readers pleading for her to see it for the subtle pro-life message.

Crazy psycho-feminist reviewer MaryAnn Johanson at Flickfilosopher who hates any movie that suggests God may exist didn’t like the film because the protagonist decides not to get an abortion (emphasis by the author):

Look: Alison doesn’t even want to touch Ben when she finds him in her bed the morning after their alcohol-fueled romp. If he’s really that disgusting, that much of a loser — and I’m not saying he is, except that the film casts him that way — why would she even consider having his child? A smart gal calls the clinic, gets an abortion, feels bad about it or doesn’t, and learns a lesson about not taking drunken losers home, or not having sex with anyone two hours after you meet him without a condom, a diaphragm, and the pill.

Pretty sick how some people regard fetuses as mere inconveniences and abortion always as the “smart” choice. Anyway, “Knocked Up” has gotten mostly positive reviews from the real critics and I’m looking for some free time to see it.

Blog at