Skip to comments.Rogerebert.com on 'Mom's Night Out' - 'Depressingly Regressive and Borderline Dangerous'
Posted on 05/12/2014 9:01:42 PM PDT by This Just In
The new comedy Mom's Night Out features a stay-at-home mother who finally gets the chance to cut loose with her girlfriends. Chaos ensues, and so do a few faith-friendly messages for the masses.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
If Roger hates it, its probably good
Rog is dead.
Mr. Ebert may be deceased, but the critics at Rogerebert.com mirror his liberal ideology.
He may be dead, but his views (literally and figuratively speaking) are alive and kicking.
only in our reality
It sounds counter-revolutionary, comrades. Ban it!
Basically it’s a film about a stay-at-home mom who goes out with the girls to party, but unlike your average “wives going out and partying” film, this movie doesn’t feature vulgarity and the celebration of infidelity, drugs, and debauchery.
Here’s a revealing gem from the critic:
“Depressingly regressive and borderline dangerous, “Moms Night Out” peddles archaic notions of gender roles in the name of wacky laughs. But it also wants to be “About Something.” It wants to inspire as well as entertain. Its “The Hangover” aimed at Christian audiences, and if that sounds like an impossible prospect, well, thats because it is.”
Not that this critic is projecting or anything. :^)
Well, they got the Commiespeak down pat.
‘Depressingly Regressive and Borderline Dangerous’
So these movie critics are no longer even pretending to review movies based on their merit, while actually judging them as to whether their content serves the Communist Party Line.
Now they’re issuing actual overt warnings as to whether a movie is “dangerous” to the Communist Party or is “regressive” with respect to Communist ideology. Fundamentally, this approach is no different than the lists of “forbidden” movies that the Catholics used to put out.
BTW, how can a film be “dangerous” or “regressive” in a truly free society with true freedom of speech and freedom of thought?
How about this statement:
“Dont be fooled by the title, or the Hangover-style trailer. Moms Night Out is really all about moms staying home, where, according to this movie, they apparently belong.”
I’m sure this is an accurate statement. /s
The only danger the film posses is to their ideology.
That’s horrible. That might result in producing well-adjusted children who grow up to vote Conservative.
“NO! SOUP FORRR YOU!”
Now that’s true progress.
‘Depressingly Regressive and Borderline Dangerous’
So these movie critics are no longer even pretending to review movies based on their merit while actually judging them as to whether their content serves the Communist (uh, “[Progressive”) Party Line, which is the usual modus operendi of the MSM move critics.
Now they’re issuing actual overt warnings as to whether a movie is “dangerous” to the Communist (uh “Progressive”) Party or is “regressive” with respect to Communist /”Progressive” ideology. Fundamentally, this ideological approach to movie reviewing is no different than the lists of “forbidden” movies that the Catholics used to put out. Which is why I no longer pay one whit of attention to MSM movie reviewers, but instead seek sites where actual viewers post their opinions of a movie.
BTW, how can a film be “dangerous” or “regressive” in a truly free society with true freedom of speech and freedom of thought? The answer of course is they can’t. Only in a society dedicated to unity of thought as approved by the central authorities can movies be “dangerous” or “regressive”. You know, like in the old Soviet Union, where all movies were banned for those very reasons if they disagreed with the official Party Line.
I occasionally use them as a gauge to determine what to see. I use the 180 degree rule. If they hate it, I'll check into it. If they love it (remember "Brokeback Mountain?"), I'll skip it.
My 19 year old daughter and I saw the trailer when we went to see Heaven Is For Real. The movie looked hilarious and both of us thought it looked worth paying to see.
Patricia Heaton from Everybody Loves Raymond and the Middle is the star and Co-Producer. And one of the few Hollywood Conservatives.
Heaven forbid that a wife and mother would prefer to stay at home and take care of the ones she loves rather than being a salaried worker caring for strangers.
Dangerous? Like a gas leak in an elementary school or dangerous like running with a pointed stick?
Moms’ Night Out (2014)
The “critics” panned it 3.9 on a scale of ten.
The audience rates it 4.3 on a scale of 5
All Critics/Top Critics
16% like it
Average Rating: 3.9/10
Reviews Counted: 31
Fresh: 5 | Rotten: 26
Cheap-looking, unfunny, and kind of sexist to boot, Moms’ Night Out is a disappointment from start to finish.
86% liked it
Average Rating: 4.3/5
User Ratings: 6,167
Libs hate that God gave women wombs, that women are fundamentally different than men. They do all they can to deny these distinctives. Sodom-ism, feminazi-ism, transgender-ism, ..., it is all rejects God’s created order.
I saw it on opening night and thought it was light-hearted fun. It’s clean, Christian silliness so of course the Hollywood left finds it horrifying.
Leftists work for Satan.
Satan hates families, because they are a representation of God’s Nature,
and they are the instrument designated by God for passing on the knowledge of God.
It isn’t really any wonder why the left hates traditional families, traditional gender roles, and has sponsored many societal/governmental policies that are detrimental to the family.
They’re just doing their ideological founder’s bidding.
A feminist once said that women shouldn’t be given the choice to stay home with children because “too many would choose it”.
In other words-
Audience: I really enjoyed that movie.
Critics: Boo! Show us your t—s!
← ← ←
A lot of changed with Roger over the past year.
So he is complaining that the film is not vulgar? wow