In his review of the new Deuce Bigelow movie, critic Roger Eberts gets back at Rob Schneider for his swipe, several months back, at LA Times reporter Patrick Goldstein:
The movie created a spot of controversy last February. According to a story
by Larry Carroll of MTV News, Rob
Schneider took offense when Patrick Goldstein of the Los Angeles Times
listed this year’s Best Picture Nominees and wrote that they were "ignored,
unloved and turned down flat by most of the same studios that … bankroll
hundreds of sequels, including a follow-up to ‘Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo,’ a
film that was sadly overlooked at Oscar time because apparently nobody had the
foresight to invent a category for Best Running Penis Joke Delivered by a
Schneider retaliated by attacking Goldstein in full-page ads in Daily
Variety and the Hollywood Reporter. In an open letter to Goldstein,
Schneider wrote: "Well, Mr. Goldstein, I decided to do some research to find out
what awards you have won. I went online and found that you have won nothing.
Absolutely nothing. No journalistic awards of any kind … Maybe you didn’t win
a Pulitzer Prize because they haven’t invented a category for Best Third-Rate,
Unfunny Pompous Reporter Who’s Never Been Acknowledged by His Peers."
Reading this, I was about to observe that Schneider can dish it out but he
can’t take it. Then I found he’s not so good at dishing it out, either. I went
online and found that Patrick Goldstein has won a National Headliner Award, a
Los Angeles Press Club Award, a RockCritics.com award, and the Publicists’ Guild
award for lifetime achievement.
Schneider was nominated for a 2000 Razzie
Award for Worst Supporting Actor, but lost to Jar-Jar Binks.
But Schneider is correct, and Patrick Goldstein has not yet won a Pulitzer
Prize. Therefore, Goldstein is not qualified to complain that Columbia financed
Bigalow: European Gigolo" while passing on the opportunity to participate in
Dollar Baby," "Ray,"
Neverland." As chance would have it, I have won the Pulitzer Prize,
and so I am qualified. Speaking in my official capacity as a Pulitzer Prize
winner, Mr. Schneider, your movie sucks.
(Thanks to William Rabkin for the heads-up on this!)
20 thoughts on “Mr. Schneider, Your Movie Sucks”
Ha! I love it.
Roger’s a great critic who really loves movies. He also has an excellent sense of humor.
I agree with him about as often as I agree with anybody–but I’m actually hoping to get into one of the Chicago film festivals just so I can invite him to the show.
I read the Ebert article yesterday and damn near split my spleen laughing. “..Mr Schneider, your movie sucks.” is now at the top of my list as stab-to-the-groin of the year.
What’s the old saying that came to mind when Schneider took out full page ads?
Oh, yeah. Methinks he doth protest too much.
Then again, I’ve never won any awards. No Shamuses. No Edgars. No Anthonies or Barries. Although Ed MacMahon once told me I may already be a winner. (I framed that letter.)
Well, that’s not true. I did get an award. I was runner-up for class clown in 1984. Guess that qualifies me to say his movie sucks.
And in the true spirit of the Internet, I haven’t seen either DEUCE BIGALOW movie.
Somehow, I doubt my cred on the subject is in danger.
Rob Scneider may be a multi-millionaire but he is also an immature moron. I don’t find anything about him entertaining and he probably would not apear in most of the movies that I would see.
It’s sad that Columbia Pictures does not balance it’s easy buck picture with some risky ventures but everyone knows that nowadays it’s “All about the benjamins”, oh wait, isn’t that another movie title?
Schneider was nominated for a 2000 Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actor, but lost to Jar-Jar Binks.
Oh, ouch. Rob Schneider just lost his cajones. I think they landed somewhere over there…
Deuce Bigalow’s sequel was made because the first movie, which cost next to nothing, made money. And because Schneider’s sugar daddy is Adam Sandler, who is considered a studio gold mine.
I agree with Ebert’s points – but really it’s on us, just don’t see the movies, don’t rent them, don’t have anything to do with them. I stopped seeing Sandler movies after The Wedding Singer and I won’t see them – I don’t think they’re good. I know some folks do – but I don’t, and it seems to me that Deuce Bigalow isn’t that far away in taste, really, from most of Sandler’s flicks.
I can’t find any Deuce Bigelow fanfic.
I seriously doubt Rob Schneider is a multi-millionaire. I think he’s some Studio Exec’s pool boy, if you get my drift.
Given how successful the first film was, I imagine Schneider made several million off of it, plus several more for the sequel. Granted, he might have spend it all on hookers and beer…
Keith: I’ll get right on it, shall I?
I actually like Wedding Singer. I think Sandler has some creativity. He just knows that toilet humor pays the rent.
I liked Wedding Singer, too. Most Adam Sandler movies, though, are, um, toilet humor.
And I sat next to Roger Ebert at the 2001 Sundance Film Festival and he was a really nice guy.
I think what’s his name loses. What IS what’s his name?
Wedding Singer was very lazy in terms of story, though – most of the eighties details were off – and I think that sums up Sandler – it doesn’t matter how good the story is, he goes in, screams and acts like an idiot, and that’s that – it pissed me off, because it COULD have been much, much better. But it wasn’t. For every one decent thing (Drew) there were ten awful things (not gonna go there right now).
I’m told that the film he did with PT Anderson was pretty good – maybe, but he’ll followed it with, Anger Management, I think – Sandler’s going to have to make a lot more PT Anderson films before I trust him with my ten bucks.
Lazy. Like that Jimmy Fallon film, Taxi, which, when you think about it, isn’t that much worse than Deuce Bigalow, is it (caveat, I haven’t seen either of those films, but I don’t necessarily have to eat crap to know it tastes bad – I can tell by the smell).
Just my two cents.
Joshua: Yes, Punch-Drunk Love was very good.
He’ll have to do a lot more movies like that before I’ll see a single one –
What I found surprising is that Rob Schneider knows how to go online.
Then again, apparently he’s not very good at it.
I don’t blaim Schneider. Bad movies or not, the comment made about him was a cheap shot and I’m really sick of people making a point about one thing by taking a cheap shot at someone else. It’s uncalled for and rude.
I don’t understand your defense of Schneider – he took issue with a critic, publicly lambasted said critic with unfounded statements and got a return volley from another critic who took issue with Schneider’s statements found to be false (i.e. awards, etc.)
I don’t think it’s a cheap shot to say that someone’s movie sucks. Especially if it does. If you think Ebert is wrong, write an essay why Schneider’s movie is more deserving of praise. Are you seriously contending that Deuce Bigalow is a better film investment than Million Dollar Baby, or a better artistic statement? what are you saying?
In terms of cheap shots, what about the shots taken and big women, deformed women, women in general in Schneider’s movie?
Hey, maybe you’re a fan of the man, that’s your right – but let’s not pretend he’s not in some part responsible for the work he does. It’s his movie, his name is above the title and if it’s bad (which I believe it to be) then I blame him. Of all the people working on the film, he’s the one with the most creative control on the Deuce Bigalow films. So if it’s bad, he’s to blame. Either he should make a better product or at least grow a thicker skin. Or go into another business.
Maybe I’m not getting the whole story, but it seems to me that the intial critic was not do a review of Schneider’s movie, but was criticizing Hollywood for making movies like Duece Bigalow starring a third-rate comic.
Now, whether or not that statement is true, it seems like a completely unnecessary dig at Schneider, so I don’t blame him for reacting.
Could he have done it with a little more class? Yes. But so could the critic.