Surprisingly, Vincent Gallo is the name of a director, although Ebert did love franks. If you're referring to Schneider, I always thought it was funny that, for once, Ebert had it out with someone he could have destroyed both in his column and in the wrestling ring.

Batman Forever is fine and most people thought it was fine.

What's your stake? How much of the gross? Net? Stock options?

The only reason it even comes up is because it was a bad movie in a lot of obvious ways.

I don't think that's what most people disliked about the movie, though.

Sure, why not? Argo was forgettable but competent, and it showed he can work the hype machine as a director. That's probably more important to this project than his skill in the big chair.

I don't know what people see in Prince of Darkness. It's aimless and boring and squanders the potential of the eerie dream sequence that caps it.

It's true of the era in the way the comment explained it. You may have missed it but there's a lot of boarding schools in British fantasy and horror.

It's better than most takes on Lovecraft's themes. For instance, it's much better than Lovecraft's.

If not for The Thing, it would be Carpenter's best.

It's more like a normal word that critics have always used to describe movies where the good parts might not balance out the bad.

I'd like to think they'd both still have moved on.

Village of the Damned isn't great, but it's better than Prince of Darkness. I'd be interested to see Carpenter's take on Creature from the Black Lagoon, a cheesy old movie that's smarter than it needs to be.

Doesn't help that Schneider made himself infamous among critics by trying to take Roger Ebert on directly, which in his case was like trying to fight a volcano by jumping into it.

I'd always heard the compact map in "New Vegas" made traveling between points of interest a breeze if you stuck to the roads. My personal experience with it was that I had a choice in the early game between instant death off the road and dire boredom if I stayed on it. Huge empty zones like the entrance to the Khan…

"Fallout: New Vegas" has a weak opening. Since you're not a vault dweller as in most other Fallout games, you're given little to suggest why your exploits would matter or why the world around you would shock or amaze, so part of the series' impetus for clearing objectives gets lost down the drain. The game itself is a…

There's everything but an actual grain of salt sitting in the Fallout box working to get you to take the game with one. It's not so much a game about the aftermath of nuclear war as a game that asks, "What if every campy post-apocalyptic science fiction story in the history of trash happened all at once?" So of course…

There's a debate to be had over Wonder Woman's roots, but radical feminism, they ain't.

I was surprised they didn't go that route too, since the astronaut character is how they introduced the alien in the '90s TV cartoon and plenty of their audience would have seen it.

And if filmmakers attempt to portray the audience with as much honesty as they do sympathy, you end up with the reaction Raimi got from the super-fans. That's the unspoken cardinal sin to comic book readers of lame-cool Peter Parker in "Spider-Man 3": the scene makes fun of nerds.