Durpa Durpa Tweedlie Durpa Durp

Here's why I love Roger Ebert as a critic. Not because his opinions are always valid (they aren't) or because he has such penetrating insights into film (he mostly doesn't), but because every once in a while, he's willing to just put a hurting on some deserving filmmaker. When he really doesn't like a movie, he'll attack it as few other critics are willing. He even published a book, called "I Hated Hated Hated This Movie," compiling all of his cruellest reviews.

Today, he really goes for Rob Schneider's jugular in his Deuce Bigalow 2 review.

Just to give you a bit of background, in February of this year, Pat Goldstein, a movie columnist for the LA Times, commented that the 2004 Oscar-nominated films had a hard time finding financial backing at first, whereas studios were only too happy to greenlight movies like Deuce Bigalow 2.

Now, granted, Goldstein went for a cheap joke at Schneider's expense in the original column, and Goldstein himself ain't much for deep insights into the cinema. (His column tends to treat tired old trends from several months ago as fresh, penetrating discoveries. Like "Studios can't get enough comic book movies!" or "Remakes are all the craze!" or "Lots of guys seem to like looking at Jessica Simpson's massive breasts!")

But still, if you're Robert Schneider, you've got to get used to such comments. I mean, you make your living churning out some of the worst drivel imaginable - it's only natural you'll be savaged by film critics. Just get over it.

Bobby, instead, decided to take out a full-page ad in Variety blasting Goldstein. Not very classy.

Here's what Ebert had to say:

Schneider retaliated by attacking Goldstein in full-page ads in Daily Variety and the Hollywood Reporter. In an open letter to Goldstein, Schneider wrote: "Well, Mr. Goldstein, I decided to do some research to find out what awards you have won. I went online and found that you have won nothing. Absolutely nothing. No journalistic awards of any kind ... Maybe you didn't win a Pulitzer Prize because they haven't invented a category for Best Third-Rate, Unfunny Pompous Reporter Who's Never Been Acknowledged by His Peers."

Odd, that Schneider's response isn't at all witty despite his stated career of "comedian."

Reading this, I was about to observe that Schneider can dish it out but he can't take it. Then I found he's not so good at dishing it out, either. I went online and found that Patrick Goldstein has won a National Headliner Award, a Los Angeles Press Club Award, a RockCritics.com award, and the Publicists' Guild award for lifetime achievement.

Schneider was nominated for a 2000 Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actor, but lost to Jar-Jar Binks.

Ouch. Remember, kids, don't get on Roger Ebert's bad side. That guy can be grouchy. But it gets even worse.

But Schneider is correct, and Patrick Goldstein has not yet won a Pulitzer Prize. Therefore, Goldstein is not qualified to complain that Columbia financed "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo" while passing on the opportunity to participate in "Million Dollar Baby," "Ray," "The Aviator," "Sideways" and "Finding Neverland." As chance would have it, I have won the Pulitzer Prize, and so I am qualified. Speaking in my official capacity as a Pulitzer Prize winner, Mr. Schneider, your movie sucks.

Ba-zing. I hope Rob Schneider has read this, and taken a few moments to consider the possibility, just the possibility, that every movie critic and sensible film viewer in the world is right, and he totally sucks. It won't be an easy thing to face up to, but I'd say it's about time.