Wednesday, February 02, 2005
Michael Medved Is a Golden Turkey
SPOILERS for Million Dollar Baby lie ahead. Be warned.
I've long held a distrust of Michael Medved. He's a man whose politics provide too much of an influence on his movie reviews. Hell, even his fabled Golden Turkey Awards books are victim to this, as it appears that the main reason he called Reflections of a Golden Eye one of the worst 200 movies of all time is because it sympathetically portrayed a gay military officer.
So, of course, it should come as little surprise that Medved is spoiling the end of Million Dollar Baby because he disagrees with the film's right-to-die message*. Of course, Rush Limbaugh's done the same, but that is understandable, as he is a political commentator. Medved, on the other hand, is first and foremost a film critic. It's not his job to ruin a person's prospective filmgoing experience because he doesn't like the message. If he had said, "Many, like I, will strongly disagree with the film's message", and various other expressions of disgust, then good. But no. He had to go and spoil the movie for everyone who has the misfortune to read his column or hear him on some talking head show.
Just know that, were Michael Medved reviewing movies in the '60s, he probably would have spoiled the ending of Psycho because he disagrees with transvestism.
*And yes, I'm aware of the massive irony of this coming from Roger "Team America Wasn't Balanced Enough" Ebert, but at least he didn't spoil anything about the movie.
I've long held a distrust of Michael Medved. He's a man whose politics provide too much of an influence on his movie reviews. Hell, even his fabled Golden Turkey Awards books are victim to this, as it appears that the main reason he called Reflections of a Golden Eye one of the worst 200 movies of all time is because it sympathetically portrayed a gay military officer.
So, of course, it should come as little surprise that Medved is spoiling the end of Million Dollar Baby because he disagrees with the film's right-to-die message*. Of course, Rush Limbaugh's done the same, but that is understandable, as he is a political commentator. Medved, on the other hand, is first and foremost a film critic. It's not his job to ruin a person's prospective filmgoing experience because he doesn't like the message. If he had said, "Many, like I, will strongly disagree with the film's message", and various other expressions of disgust, then good. But no. He had to go and spoil the movie for everyone who has the misfortune to read his column or hear him on some talking head show.
Just know that, were Michael Medved reviewing movies in the '60s, he probably would have spoiled the ending of Psycho because he disagrees with transvestism.
*And yes, I'm aware of the massive irony of this coming from Roger "Team America Wasn't Balanced Enough" Ebert, but at least he didn't spoil anything about the movie.
