Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« A Belated Clinton Endorsement | Anti-Bag Tax "Coalition" Drops... »

Thursday, September 11, 2008

When Shitty Movie Reviewers Attack!

posted by on September 11 at 12:42 PM

At a screening of Danny Boyle’s new movie Slumdog Millionaire, New York Post critic Lou Lumenick apparently beat the beloved and ailing Roger Ebert about the face and head with a plastic binder.

From the New York Daily News:

Soon after the lights went down, a source tells us, “a man in the audience started yelling, ‘Don’t touch me!’ People looked around and shrugged. Ten minutes later, the voice yells again, ‘I said don’t touch me!’”

Again, people shrugged off the disturbance. But a few minutes later, says our source, “the guy stands up in the darkness and thwacks the guy behind him with a big festival binder. He hit him so hard everybody could hear it. Everyone freaked out and turned around.”

After battling thyroid and salivary gland cancer for years, Ebert, 66, can no longer speak.

“Apparently, Roger was just trying to tap Lumenick on the shoulder to signal him that he couldn’t see the movie,” surmises our source. “He was trying to ask him to move over a bit.”

Though Lumenick seemed surprised to see whom he had struck, he offered no apology, according to another source.

Thanks to PopTart for the tip. And to Lou Lumenick: fuck off.

RSS icon Comments

1

That's what you get for saying The Matrix Reloaded was better than The Matrix. That's what you get for saying Home Alone 3 was better than Home Alone. That's what you deserve for sucking M. Night Shyamalan's dick every chance you get. And finally, that's what you get for your shitty movie reviews. Everybody hates you. Fucking die already.

Posted by make like siskel and branch | September 11, 2008 12:51 PM
2

Yikes.

Posted by Andrew | September 11, 2008 12:53 PM
3

@1
Everybody doesn't hate him.
I like him.

Posted by ebon | September 11, 2008 1:20 PM
4

You have very strong feelings about ailing movie-reviewers. Seek help.

Posted by DENVEROPOLIS | September 11, 2008 1:21 PM
5

Oooh, @1, that was super classy. So the guy gave some reviews you didn't like. Sure, let's wish horrifying, agonizing death on the dude.

Much like I'm wishing upon you right now. Do you feel it?

Posted by haunted leg | September 11, 2008 1:22 PM
6

The man who said that CRASH was the best film of that year and called MILLION DOLLAR BABY a masterpiece has had more than a slap with a festival binder coming for a long long time.

Posted by Roscoe | September 11, 2008 1:30 PM
7

What kind of wacko beats someone (even with a plastic binder) for being tapped on the shoulder? Fuck, I want to file assault charges on behalf of Ebert.

Posted by EmilyP | September 11, 2008 1:49 PM
8

Also, to the people who wish for or advocate physical violence against someone for their OPINION on MOVIES: you are miserable excuses for human beings.

Posted by EmilyP | September 11, 2008 1:51 PM
9

I often strongly disagree with his reviews, but I enjoy his writing on film. He does so more intelligently than most film critics anytime in the last 30 years.

If you're considering hitting a stranger in the head with a large binder in a dark movie house, please consider suicide first. Just do so quietly.

Posted by Dougsf | September 11, 2008 1:53 PM
10

Sure, you can quibble about a review you disagree with here or there, but come on. The guy has been an icon of film criticism for decades. I may not always agree with his choices 100%, but his reasoning and criticism is sound most of the time. He deserves better treatment than this. Pretty much anyone deserves better treatment than this. Lou Lumenick is an ass.

Posted by Reverse Polarity | September 11, 2008 2:08 PM
11

Roger Ebert is a great movie critic for the following reason: whether you agree with his final verdict or not, you can generally determine from his review whether *you*'ll like the movie or not.

Posted by whatwhat | September 11, 2008 2:56 PM
12

How stunted are some people to think that; "I disagree with his movie review so he deserved to be assaulted"

Posted by Bellevue Ave | September 11, 2008 2:57 PM
13

#11: Absolutely.

Posted by Tiktok | September 11, 2008 3:01 PM
14

My AIM SN (Since the 5th grade) is ihateRogerEbert. And guess who posted #1!

Posted by Represent. | September 11, 2008 3:07 PM
15

I have nothing but respect for Roger Ebert, and contempt for that miserable fuck from the Post. Ebert brought a deeper appreciation of film to "the masses."

But for me, Kenneth Turan of the L.A. Times is much closer to my own take on movies.

Posted by Big Sven | September 11, 2008 3:08 PM
16

ps- I would sic a pit bull on Anthony Lane of the New Yorker. What a cock.

Posted by Big Sven | September 11, 2008 3:11 PM
17

@14 - Gee, I wonder who it is? *eyeroll*

Posted by kid icarus | September 11, 2008 3:15 PM
18

Looks like he's already responded about the "incident":

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080911/EDITOR/809119972

Posted by yelahneb | September 11, 2008 4:18 PM
19

How can you not love the screenwriter of Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls?

Posted by elswinger | September 11, 2008 4:27 PM
20

Motherfucker wrote Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls. Show some respect.

Posted by W.T. Foxtrot | September 11, 2008 4:27 PM
21

JINX!

Now you have to say "I'd like to strap you on" and dance all shimmy like.

Posted by W.T. Foxtrot | September 11, 2008 4:29 PM
22

M. Night Shyamalan? Ebert liked Birth, the Cell, the Illusionist, and Signs, but hated Hide and Seek, Lady in the Water, the Village, and Wide Awake. He kind of liked the Sixth Sense, but didn't care for Stuart Little.

I see no dicksucking here.

Posted by Little Stuart | September 11, 2008 5:14 PM
23

His web comments show just what a class act Mr. Ebert is and has always been. And he'd be that even if his taste was generally excellent. Apart from his up-thumb for "The Passion of the Christ," of course.

Posted by TLjr | September 11, 2008 7:33 PM
24
Posted by snarky | September 11, 2008 9:36 PM
25

#1 - I just re-read Ebert's review of Matrix Reloaded and he never says anywhere that it's better than The Matrix. His review of Home Alone 3 does say he thinks it's better than the first two. You must be basing your assumption on the number of stars he assigns (3 1/2 for Reloaded and 3 for The Matrix). But if you read Ebert regularly you would know that he puts no stock in his star ratings. He uses them only because his editors force it upon him. And he constantly argues that you can't compare star ratings across different films. If you want to know what he thinks of a film you have to read the review.

#22 - You obviously did a search at Ebert's website for "shyamalan" to come up with that list of films. M. Night Shyamalan was not involved in the productions of Birth, The Cell, The Illusionist or Hide and Seek. And he is a credited screenwriter on Stuart Little. If you had read the reviews of those films you would have seen that he simply referenced Shyamalan's work.

But as to #1's comment, Ebert liked The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, Signs and The Happening. So Ebert liked 4/7 M. Night Shyamalan films. Hardly 'dicksucking'.

Posted by Jason | September 12, 2008 9:41 AM
26

I think the bigger outrage here is that a very big guy assaulted a much smaller guy that was seated AND in a freakin' neck brace! Just shows how much more dangerous the world is for the handicapped and how cowardly some able-bodied people can be.

Had I been there, I would have "intervened," alright. Ever notice how often bullies confront people who can't fight back?

Message to Lou: try that shit at NY's AMC 25 some day.

Posted by MovieLover6 | September 14, 2008 7:45 PM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.