Comments on: Dan Schneider on Critical Mass – Movie Critic Interviews

By: Jose Sinclair

Jose Sinclair — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:10:15 +0000

Very interesting interview.. though I would disagree with some of his comments, as would most.. It’s hard to find any critic or film fan that you will agree with 100%, not even a twin or a grandparent. I enjoy those who take the opposite viewpoint of “the masses”, who are usually proven wrong (Titanic, Gone With the Wind, Jaws, which I found laughable). If we wanted the lowest common denominator in a film reviewer, we would just look at top box office gross.

Schneider, at the very least, is not afraid to piss people off, and his honesty makes him at least refreshing, and probably fun to argue with in person. His list of great directors, and pans, is hard to argue with, though I didn’t see De Sica in there, and I can overlook that.

By: Roger Ebert vs. Dan Schneider

Roger Ebert vs. Dan Schneider — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 20:34:16 +0000

[...] I interviewed him for my Critical Mass series, it sparked a firestorm that resulted in the following comments from [...]

By: Shane

Shane — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:55:47 +0000

“A bag of cocks.” Heh. That’s a new one to me. Great stuff.

Of all the interviews I’ve done so far, the one with Mr. Schneider has certainly drew the most reaction. Of course, it’s not hard to see why.

Thanks for the comments, Filmist. Good to hear from you.

By: The Filmist

The Filmist — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 06:07:20 +0000

Wow, this guy really is something else. A weird blend of pseudo-tough guy film criticism, self-aggrandizement every other paragraph both in interviews and in pieces of individual films themselves, and an outright lack of the same social skills he seems to have posited that several of his interviewees were missing. Two moments that killed me, primarily, were his interviews with Edward Hoagland and James Berardinelli, where he lambasted the former’s speech impediment among other things, and put the latter’s taste in film’s down to ‘boy in me’ apologeticism.

Also, from his interview with Hoagland, he seems to think that saying things like: “This site is one of the most important web sites online,” and “I’m doing you a favor, no one reads your stuff anymore,” in all earnestness, will somehow get you a serious response.

This guy’s a dweeb – a very punchable guy. And, if you’ll allow me to depart from professionalism for a second, a right douchebag and “a bag of cocks,” to quote Lee Papa, from his interview with him.

By: Irony

Irony — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:52:17 +0000

“It’s amazing how many people invest themselves so deeply in things they had no part of.”

By: Shane

Shane — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:16:41 +0000

Thanks for the comment, Kam. Next time, I hope you won’t hold back.

By: Kam

Kam — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 05:01:14 +0000

This guy is a huge joke. He has horrible taste…. case and point praising Spiderman 3 while bashing The dark knight, Brokeback, Crash, All Spielberg movies, Blade runner, all other classics, etc. He is also very homophobic, just read his reviews on Brokeback mountain. He is lucky is not a legit respected “real” critic who people know about otherwise he would be in a load of trouble for his gay slurs. He thinks very highly of his own idiotic opinion and bashes legit respected critics. Thankfully he is only an internet guy, meaning he is unimportant and everything he says is irrelevant.

By: Will

Will — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 16:26:13 +0000

And in what capacity does he review for the Criterion Collection? I certainly can’t find anything on their site about him.

By: Will

Will — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 16:24:00 +0000

Is this guy for real? His knowledge of the films he’s talking about is superficial at best and yet he places himself above pretty much every major film critic of the last 60 years.