.... considers this to be one of the worst films of all time. Another reason to watch Sam Peckinpah's brilliant and violent film.
If you're unsure of who Michael Medved is, he's the self-righteous film critic who was outraged - OUTRAGED! - with the ending of "Million Dollar Baby", spoiling the ending of the film and accusing it of advocating the right to die (by the by, I support it). However, that was hardly Clint Eastwood's intention with the film.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I cannot stand that prissy, obnoxious, self-righteous a$$hole Michael Medved. Who the hell does he think he is saying that about Million Dollar Baby? Let alone dissing a masterwork like Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia!
shareYeah, Medved gets fruity with his Christian-bent to every review he does. I can imagine that this movie seriously ruffled his feathers - nonchalant brutality towards women, abuse of corpses, old ladies getting gunned down by smiling dudes, casual drunk driving, religious figures involved with criminal organizations . . .
As for Million Dollar Baby, there were a dozen ways to slam that movie without bringing political philosphy into it, which proves furthermore what a hack Medved is.
[deleted]
[deleted]
MM thinks "Ivan the Terrible" and "Last Year at Marienbad" are two of the worst films ever made. Give you any idea of his acumen?
shareI remember seeing one of his books years ago where 'Bring me the Head of Alfredo Garcia' was placed in the same category as 'Plan 9 fom outer Space' and 'Robot Monster'.
I used to think Medved was amusing, until I actually saw 'Bring me the Head of Alfredo Garcia'
I can understand someone not liking the movie, but to claim it is one of the worst is ridiculous.
Medved is a joke.
Kim, you stole the words right out of my mouth. :)
shareNothing wrong with not liking certain films and having political reasons for not liking them. Wasn't it fashionable for left-wing critics in the 70's to label every film they had problems with as "fascist". Stanley Kubrick, Sam Peckinpah, Clint Eastwood, etc.: if they made something that wasn't deemed politically correct enough, or god-forbid had a rape scene in it, then Wham-o!: "Fascist"!
No, the problem with Medved is that he has crossed the line from being a film critic to being a "culture critic". In other words he is one of many self-important and self-appointed CNN talking heads, like Ariana Huffington, who don't appear to do much work or accomplish anything really productive in life except listen to themselves talk on cable TV. Medved should just write film reviews and give the talk show circuit alone for a while. He appears on such shows (plugging his latest book, coincidentally) due to the twenty-four hour news cycle that gives the almost-famous a forum to blather on much longer than their expertise in the topic at hand would warrant.
Shouldn't he be attending a film festival or something, isn't that his job? He spends more time talking about how films fit in with his political views and less time interpreting films as works of art which they are. Or viewing himself as an art-critic, which he is, or should be. His expertise is in film and he should stop acting like a one-man Political Action Committee. Frankly, it makes his and objectivity and professionalism as a film critic seem suspect. I am not saying liberal film critics and movies stars have never made this mistake also (Jane Fonda to whit), but it is a slippery slope and Medved has gone down the chute into the Buddhist Hell of Pompous Film Critics.
Agree. Medved getting his panties in a wad about this {good} movie is no different from Roger Ebert getting his panties in a wad about the {great} movie Team America: World Police. According to Medved the portrayals in this movie {violence against women, etc.} are simply "wrong", and according to Ebert the portrayals of idiot, pompous leftists getting blown to bits in TAWP was simply "wrong". Both are hacks.
shareMedved is a d!ck.
That is all.
well first of all you should also give spoilers on your own post then when you talk about Million Dollar Baby. Not that you spoiled it to me, the funny thing is I heard about it because of the controversy around Medved saying it. I wouldn't waste my time reading his column so I would never have heard that otherwise anyway. So the controversy such as it is, is equally as responsible as Medved although perhaps less culpable because unlike Medved it has no individual choice in the matter.
Anyway I think it was actually Medved's brother who published this as one of the 50 worst films of all time, I was recently corrected on that. Harry Medved, a total buffoon as far as I can tell who lives like a vulture simply by criticizing movies he doesn't like and has never offered anything constructive to film analysis or film history. He's like a spokesman for all the people out there who not only like to laugh at bad movies, which is fine and admirable in its own right in my opinion, but who like to make personal comments and degrading associations about the people who made them.
But anyway "Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia" was far from a bad movie for me although I would describe it as challenging, perhaps even difficult to watch at least the first time. Maybe Harry Medved's brain just could not handle all the contradictory information. And certainly everyone has a right to their opinion but those who publish them deserve and do receive additional criticism themselves. I'd like to read what his reasoning was actually. But there were a number of other good and great films on his list, and he's also known for saying Ed Wood was the worst director of all time when in reality Wood is one of the more fascinating and unique of the B movie directors of the 1950s.
Did I not love him, Cooch? MY OWN FLESH I DIDN'T LOVE BETTER!!! But he had to say 'Nooooooooo'
"50 Worst Movies Of All Time" was a terrific book, a very funny take on junk culture before the era of Entertainment Weekly and A/V Club. Its follow-up, "The Golden Turkey Awards", brought Ed Wood to a wider audience, and indirectly led to the making of the movie classic "Ed Wood".
"Alfredo Garcia" is a good movie. The book, for good or ill, was not a serious work of scholarship. I think it still stands up, however well some of the fifty, namely "Garcia", may also now stand up. I'm sure there are others who were shocked by the inclusion of "Last Year At Marienbad" or "Ivan The Terrible". The authors, who were Michael and Harry Medved, were clearly taking on different types of movies, and wanted an ultraviolent 70s film to send up, preferably with a silly-sounding name. Peckinpah was a clear choice, just which one.
Too bad they didn't pick the overrated "Pat Garrett & Billy The Kid", or "The Killer Elite", which is silly. Neither are the 50 worst, but they are fun to send up. So too is "Alfredo Garcia", despite the fact it is much better than either of those.
The book has been out of print for more than 20 years. We are still talking about it. Sort of like Sam, no?
Jeez, let a guy have an opinion. I like much of Medved and dislike some of his POV, too. Doesn't make him wicked or ignorant because I disagree.
LL
Even referring to Medved as ANY kind of critic is disingenuous in itself. Comparing him to boils, carbuncles and cysts...I'd feel is more apt. Loud moralists often lead conflicted dual lives. Medved's ones added together may still not encompass yet a whole one.
share