Ebert was the better writer, Siskel had better taste

www.rogerebert.com/reviews/orgazmo-1998

Orgazmo, as reimagined by Ebert.

For someone who wrote for Russ Meyer and gave positive attention to trashy sexploitation back in its heyday, you'd think he would have a better sense of humor.

Okay let's not start acting like Orgazmo is genius or anything. It has a few funny scenes and that's it

It's not that he gave it a bad review, it's his extensive recommendations for how they could have "improved" it. I feel like he must have been joking but I don't think he was.

"Orgazmo" was a formula movie that was having fun with the formula. I thought it was clever enough, as a satire of the action genre that never let on it knew it was satire. Bort gives "Orgazmo" -- two thumbs up.

Ever since I mentioned that Orgasmo review a while back, it seems to keep organically popping up in every Roger Ebert video. Ebert's lousy sense of humour seems to be my second most powerful contribution to this site after Godfrey Ho.

Oh, wait. It seems to just be Zircon, so nevermind. I thought there were a couple other people that brought it up as well.

I don't even remember how I first found the Orgazmo review, but I try to work it into the conversation whenever it's even vaguely relevant.

Orgazmo is the best superhero movie to date, and if you don't think so, you're the target audience for Marvel, and therefore sad and Cheetos stained.

Yeah, but you haven't seen Iron Man 3. It has AN ARMY OF IRON MANS.

I don't know, what about Batman: The Movie?

Ebert wrote incredibly well about great film, and very amusingly about films that suck. Look at Ebert's 'Great Movies' list and read what he has to say and there is no question about his taste. Orgasmo was a stupid movie for an audience that is either stupid or in the mood for stupidity.

But Brain Candy isn't.

Ebert was a fucking bourgeois hack with quotidian tastes and writing habits.

https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/ebert/

Well, of course, why would I actually cite one of his reviews or give an example of the kind of style I object to when I can offer a link to an 3dgy, bitchy article and a cartoon? Maybe there's some sort of actual argument in the link you sent, but it's not worth logging in to find it.

Eileen Jones is smarter than you.

It's possible, many are. But I have opinions I didn't crib from a blog, and I can relate the same in adult speech when asked without restorting to ad hominem. Keep me up to date on your reading, will you?

It's 2013, and you resorted to "bourgeois" as an insult.

The end.

Wow. They expect people to pay to read that garbage?

Pretty much, i truly miss them.

I think this movie might actually be more enjoyable if you haven't been exposed to KitH before. It's a good introduction to them, but ironically not as fun for fans because they expect better from them.

Man, the chemistry between these two was really lightning in a bottle. Ebert and Roper were so bland in comparison. Roper worshiped campy horror films, disliked cartoons (aside from Pixar stuff) and otherwise just agreed with Ebert on more or less everything.

Yeah, that seems like a fair answer.