Siskel & Ebert - Soul Man (1986)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 4 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 221

  • @ManicMindTrick
    @ManicMindTrick 9 років тому +80

    The distortion in the picture leading to face morphing remind me of a bad psychedelic trip.

    • @captainpungent
      @captainpungent 7 років тому +6

      Reminds me of 'They Live'

    • @eirikrodberg3614
      @eirikrodberg3614 6 років тому +3

      i thought the same thing.

    • @YouCantHoldOnTooLong
      @YouCantHoldOnTooLong 6 років тому +3

      It would have been even crazier if Gene's suit all of a sudden said "No Independent Thought". Then they show Roger and his suit says "Do Not Question Authority". Then the whole screen when showing clips from Soul Man is only audio and it says "OBEY" on it! That would be Roddy Piper's opportunity to jump into the studio armed with ammunition and sunglasses and he says "I have come here to chew bubblegum and blow away imbecilic movie critics...and I'm all out of bubblegum!"
      ~Dutch

    • @vickigraves859
      @vickigraves859 5 років тому

      ManicMiind .. this was cutting edge back in the day.....

    • @unapprovedtruth7116
      @unapprovedtruth7116 4 роки тому +2

      Reptilian shapeshifting

  • @Derby14
    @Derby14 13 років тому +40

    I remember my mom telling me that the professor was actually the voice of Darth Vader when we were watching this 25 years ago and I couldn't believe it!!

  • @Mrx2848
    @Mrx2848 12 років тому +80

    The fact that they mention how C. Thomas Howell and Rae Dawn Chong had no chemistry in the movie is even weirder when you realize the two of them fell in love during filming and later got married.

    • @muffdiver240
      @muffdiver240 3 роки тому +15

      ...such extraordinary chemistry that they were married for practically a year!

    • @LocalMultiplex
      @LocalMultiplex 2 роки тому +5

      that doesn't always come across on screen though

    • @JerkVegas86
      @JerkVegas86 22 дні тому

      ​@@LocalMultiplex it definitely didn't.

  • @emotionaladolf9969
    @emotionaladolf9969 6 років тому +57

    Two thumbs way up! Gene was turning into a reptile!

    • @anonb4632
      @anonb4632 4 роки тому +6

      They Live!

    • @cwill1098
      @cwill1098 4 роки тому +1

      @@anonb4632 You beat me to it!

    • @jogman262
      @jogman262 2 роки тому

      Imhotep. Imhotep.

  • @thegrimyeaper
    @thegrimyeaper 6 років тому +60

    Thumbnail is terrifying.

  • @travishagan8951
    @travishagan8951 4 роки тому +36

    And that was the end of Ponyboy's career

    • @technofeeliak
      @technofeeliak Рік тому +2

      In the same year he appeared in "The Hitcher".
      And I'd really like to get "A Tiger's Tale" 1987.
      He's still working to this day.

    • @jetnut89
      @jetnut89 Рік тому +2

      Stay gold ponyboy… stay gold

  • @vanrose9857
    @vanrose9857 6 років тому +24

    I remember a time when you could look up a Siskel & Ebert's review on almost any major film on their website.

    • @DannyCosmos
      @DannyCosmos Рік тому +4

      they had every single review . it was amazing.. i miss it

  • @AengusFallon
    @AengusFallon 14 років тому +44

    Oddly enough, one of the basketball players is Ron Reagan as in Ronald Reagan's son.

    • @thekidfromiowa
      @thekidfromiowa 7 років тому +6

      Aengus Fallon I thought so! Just needed confirmation.

    • @scottjulie27
      @scottjulie27 5 років тому +4

      He's very good in comedies. Especially when he made that hilarious appearance hosting SNL. The skit where he was spoofing "Risky Business". While the parents were away, he slides across the hallway to "Old Time Rock & Roll" and you see a shadow of him dancing from outside the White House. :)))

    • @renzocasablancalivros2147
      @renzocasablancalivros2147 4 роки тому +2

      Met him in the 90s...nice fella

    • @reneedennis2011
      @reneedennis2011 4 роки тому

      Yup.

    • @richardramirez4602
      @richardramirez4602 3 роки тому

      no shit

  • @WaitingtoHit
    @WaitingtoHit 12 років тому +48

    I've always been shocked that this movie was even made.

    • @BaseballPlayer0
      @BaseballPlayer0 Рік тому

      why

    • @robertmcelwaine7024
      @robertmcelwaine7024 6 місяців тому

      I don't know, putting aside the need to really have to suspend disbelief that anyone in the movie would have believed Howell was a young black man. The premise had potential in doing a sharp, incisive comedy about racism, and the black experience. Unfortunately it's squandered as both Siskel and Ebert pointed out, by some infantile heavy-handed comedy. Subtlety is definitely given a wide berth. The best that can be said for it is that the filmmakers had the best of intentions, even though they got it horribly wrong.

  • @Suerte13
    @Suerte13 5 років тому +12

    Ebert should have been, Gene you are scaring the shit out of me, cut it out.

  • @troysuza2065
    @troysuza2065 3 роки тому +9

    This movie could never be made today! LMAO

    • @tomservo5007
      @tomservo5007 3 роки тому +2

      it wasn't a hit back then. Why make a flop ?

    • @marcel1372
      @marcel1372 2 роки тому

      I mean Leslie Neilsen would probably still pump out 4/10 movies if he were alive today

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому

      @@tomservo5007 It doesn’t help that it was written like a bad sitcom. It could have worked if more actual thoughtfulness went into its approach rather than just play it all for cheap laughs.

    • @ricomajestic
      @ricomajestic 2 роки тому

      @@tomservo5007 Those are always the best films to remake. Nothing worse than remaking a classic!

    • @pickuptruck8802
      @pickuptruck8802 Рік тому

      Good this is crap

  • @browsertab
    @browsertab 10 років тому +10

    The film means well but you never like the protagonist because what he does is such an asshole move.

    • @PJVids83
      @PJVids83 6 років тому +1

      He makes up for it in the end. When he realizes how his actions hurt others he repents of it. Totally redeems the character to me.

  • @crocodile2006
    @crocodile2006 4 роки тому +35

    1986: Most controversial part was the interracial love
    2020: Most controversial part was guy had a tan

    • @tomservo5007
      @tomservo5007 3 роки тому +6

      evidence of progress.

    • @gtgargon
      @gtgargon 2 роки тому +2

      according to these two, but this movie was panned for how horribly stereotypical it was

    • @psychedelicfright85
      @psychedelicfright85 Рік тому

      ​@gtgargon that was kind of the point.

    • @joe9739
      @joe9739 23 дні тому

      Most controversial part is, it killed C. Thomas Howell's career when it should have been the Director, Writers, or Producer that greenlit the damn thing. He was a young man and a good actor, who knows what he could've done ..

  • @fishfingers3024
    @fishfingers3024 3 роки тому +14

    Oh my god. I was a teen in the 80’s and even I wasn’t this stupid or racist.

  • @jstarr7506
    @jstarr7506 5 років тому +20

    This movie is pure brilliance

    • @tochiRTA
      @tochiRTA 4 роки тому +3

      just saw it for the first time. Script is brilliant. LOL at this review. Not surprising.

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому +1

      Far from it. This movie is ultimately written like a sitcom.

    • @technofeeliak
      @technofeeliak Рік тому

      @@RocStarr913 it's exactly like Animal Farm.

    • @alsharpe
      @alsharpe 12 днів тому

      It's brilliant to idiots.

  • @TheDrmcvey
    @TheDrmcvey 12 років тому +21

    Darth Vader takes no excuses!

  • @kate1269
    @kate1269 3 роки тому +9

    Whoa ...
    I didn't know Siskle was a reptilian shapeshifter...!

    • @rodneysammons5544
      @rodneysammons5544 2 роки тому +1

      Everywhere, Howell shifted also, serpent headed when the glamor is lifted

  • @sha11235
    @sha11235 6 років тому +7

    You know who else is in this? Leslie Neilsen as the white girlfriend's dad.

    • @scottjulie27
      @scottjulie27 5 років тому +4

      Yep. He had the funniest daydream in the extremely funny dinner scene with the girlfriend's family. He imagined Mark as a Watermelon eating Pimp. hahaha.

  • @emantabrizi8218
    @emantabrizi8218 3 роки тому +11

    They should remake this. It would be a HUGE hit due to the controversy alone.

    • @jedijones
      @jedijones 3 роки тому +1

      Absolutely. Hollywood knows how to make comedies that offend people with bodily functions. Why not make one that makes people uncomfortable over something that might actually make them think?

    • @psychedelicfright85
      @psychedelicfright85 3 роки тому +1

      @@jedijones no one wants to think this way. They'd rather censor, and erase, the past... and loot, riot, and kill. Solves so much.

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому

      It would work if it actually was approached intellectually. I totally agree with Ebert that the movie’s downfall was its total lack of wit.

    • @psychedelicfright85
      @psychedelicfright85 2 роки тому

      @@RocStarr913 actually, it was your mom

    • @beyondsourgrounds5602
      @beyondsourgrounds5602 Рік тому

      Hollywood is too busy kissing woke ass to remake this lol.

  • @vova47
    @vova47 8 місяців тому

    One of the best and funniest comedies of the 80's, ahead of its time, totally misunderstood and underrated by humourless critics . It couldn't be made today in a stiff politically correct Hollywood.

  • @zanethomas6865
    @zanethomas6865 3 роки тому +4

    Roger reportedly dates Oprah Winfrey and was one of her biggest supporters when she was approached to do a TV talk show. He later was married for over 20 years to an African-American woman. The movie never does really touch in race issues the way it thinks it does.

  • @rubenpena246
    @rubenpena246 3 роки тому +5

    I love how the content section is casually avoiding the truth of this movie. It's racist as all hell! instead ppl are talking about how good an actor he was and that Leslie Neilsen was in it lol. Racist must love this movie

    • @flbphotography2239
      @flbphotography2239 3 роки тому +2

      They'll ALWAYS glance over that because IT DOESN'T AFFECT THEM!
      Dassit dassall

    • @imnojasontodd
      @imnojasontodd 3 роки тому +1

      What the movie is really talking about is how African Americans have legal privilege over everyone else. And if you want some hard truth about racism African Americans are the most racist people in the world because they feel resentful for not having something that actually doesn't exist for anybody

    • @rubenpena246
      @rubenpena246 2 роки тому +1

      @@imnojasontodd Racist troll alert. Sorry buddy, but that's not all African Americans.

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому +1

      The downfall of this movie is that it’s all played for cheap laughs like a bad sitcom. No genuine thought whatsoever was put into it.

    • @rubenpena246
      @rubenpena246 2 роки тому

      @@RocStarr913 Yeah bc we need a heartfelt movie about blackface lol Bro, your racism is showing.

  • @scottjulie27
    @scottjulie27 5 років тому +8

    It absolutely appalls me that a lot of people consider this movie an anti-black racist film. Yes, there was bigotry in the film portrayed by certain characters, such as those 2 douche bag students who kept saying those terrible black jokes throughout the movie (which they got their fill in the end by Mark, who made the African American community proud). However, the bigotry was a backdrop of what Mark had to unexpectedly go through - along with the stereotypes - in exchange for disguising himself as an African American college applicant. Like James Earl Jones said to him in the end after Mark's revelation: "You learned something I could never teach my students. You know what it feels like to be black." Mark's response to that soon after was perfect. However, the film is not at all portrayed as anti-black nor promoting racism in anyway. The only people who say that, most likely, never saw the film. As a matter of fact, all the black people in this film, such as Sara's parents, even the servant in the extremely funny dinner scene, were the most normal, while the white people were the ones that were insane. :))) The black characters, such as Rae Dawn Chong and James Earl Jones was incredible, and Rae Dawn Chong's son was adorable. Mark's relationship and chemistry with Sara was as genuine as Whitney Huston and Kevin Costner's in "The Bodyguard". I wish there were more interracial relationships like that in film, unlike the poor attempt in the piece of shit film "Romeo Must Die". So the film was not at all being racist the way most people thought. Actually the portrayal of the racial sterotypes was extremely funny. A lot of my black friends who saw this movie thought it was absolutely hilarious and did not in any way find this movie offensive. Besides the basketball scene, they loved the scene when Mark was going to the "BLSA" meeting (The Militant Group) Hahahaha. Actually, even if this film was very funny, it was also a serious film loosely based on the 20th century classic non-fiction novel "Black Like Me", which was the same premise, except it was a white reporter's experimentation of what it was like being black in the south during the mid 50's. It's too bad this film was somewhat overlooked. The movie was moving, it was extremely funny, and it was also educational.

    • @dantegood2195
      @dantegood2195 5 років тому +3

      First of all the lead character looked ridiculous in black face, and I that was a major turn off to many. I think a lot of people agree with you that the premise of the movie was ambitious, and it made some solid statements on anti-black racism. It’s just that the execution of the movie was terrible, and it overall treated racism as too jokey-jokey.
      How can you compare this mediocre movie to black like me? One of the more poignant novels in literary history

    • @scottjulie27
      @scottjulie27 5 років тому +3

      In comparison to the black and white films of the early-to-mid 1900's, I think the mention of "Blackface" to describe this film is a little too extreme, don't you think? And keep in mind, I am not a racist, ok? I did not speak ill against black people, and I did not show ANY disrespect in mentioning about that great novel "Black Like Me". I said the film was "LOOSELY" based on that non-fiction classic. You are attacking the wrong person. Keep in mind also: if the film was THAT appalling to the black community, don't you think that most of the black actors in that film, including the highly respectful stature of James Earl Jones, would not only have refused to be in this movie, but would've heavily boycotted this film themselves?

    • @scottjulie27
      @scottjulie27 5 років тому

      D White Thank you very much. :))) And I will definitely look into that book that you referred me to. :)))

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому +1

      It wasn’t exactly approached intellectually or cleverly or sensitively. Everything was mainly played for cheap laughs.

  • @muffycrosswire
    @muffycrosswire 11 років тому +13

    tommy howell was a good actor in this film, his acting really improved from The Outsiders.

  • @realplayer54
    @realplayer54 Рік тому +1

    I saw this as a comedy first. Everyone knew the premise was ridiculous and that was the point. However, although the dinner table scene and the basketball scenes were HILARIOUS, the scene with Rae Dawn Chong in the dorm room with his parents and the girl in his bed was HORRIBLY written. Poor Arye Gross was trying to squeeze juice from a turnip with all of his lines. The movie definitely had heart and charm and I was really interested in where it was going in the first 45 minutes or so, but it really fell flat after that.

  • @Filmation77
    @Filmation77 4 роки тому +3

    1:45 Now I get James Earl Jones Stance in the scene,but that is Fucking Extreme...I'd say "show me the police report" and let him make it up

    • @cchavezjr7
      @cchavezjr7 3 роки тому

      But, he's right. Most jobs will fire you for not showing up because of an arrest or other things. That's life and University should be teaching about real life, not just books.

  • @sha11235
    @sha11235 Місяць тому

    RIP to James Earl Jones.

  • @marcel1372
    @marcel1372 2 роки тому +3

    Gene disintegrating in real time from this radioactive film

  • @omarharo3132
    @omarharo3132 2 роки тому +1

    Gene Siskel is... Half-Pixel Man!

  • @felixhernandez5664
    @felixhernandez5664 2 роки тому +4

    Enjoyed this movies as a kid in the 80s..

  • @LocalMultiplex
    @LocalMultiplex 2 роки тому +2

    Lol the video quality makes Gene look deformed. That being said, they were spot on with this one.

  • @CARLOSRUIZ-pe3mo
    @CARLOSRUIZ-pe3mo 2 роки тому +1

    interracial love in 86 was provocative? dang!! today even my grandma has had mandingo

  • @HandleThiSS88
    @HandleThiSS88 5 років тому +10

    I thought it was hilarious

  • @MIGGYME1
    @MIGGYME1 5 років тому +6

    Movie is criminally underrated. Thomas c howell did a phenomenal job. Had this movie been a serious role and not comedy he would of been up for some major awards. I really dont get the hate this movie got. We can make movies about brad pit being the mexican. Tom cruise can be the last samurai. Bruce leroy can be the last dragon but thomas c howell couldnt play a black man? Smh

    • @tochiRTA
      @tochiRTA 4 роки тому

      it got hate because it's too real. Simple. Same way moronic critics panned Scarface. They didn't get it. Alot of the time their privileged Whiteness prevents them from seeing what's actually real.

    • @marquiessimmons4508
      @marquiessimmons4508 3 роки тому

      Well for all of you crying Downey jr won a Oscar for doing the same thing in tropic thunder so the goal was accomplished and that movie seemed less offensive !!

    • @MIGGYME1
      @MIGGYME1 3 роки тому

      @@marquiessimmons4508 who is crying? You?

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому

      It’s because the movie was written like a bad sitcom and played it’s shock value for cheap laughs. If it had been done more intellectually, it might have had a real chance.

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому

      @@tochiRTA Critics panned Scarface because it was an uber-violent remake of an already great and classic crime drama.

  • @srp7038
    @srp7038 Рік тому +1

    I'd be interested in seeing a sequel that tries to tackle reparations. Maybe a scene like like something from those California Legislature hearings where blacks are asking for awards of diamonds, rubies, a "million dollars", etc.

  • @mogendavid6693
    @mogendavid6693 7 років тому +17

    1:40 "...no special treatment..." except for being admitted to Harvard.

    • @bobthebear1246
      @bobthebear1246 6 років тому

      Mogen David IKR

    • @karmicobsession1636
      @karmicobsession1636 6 років тому +1

      he got into harvard as his white self so no special treatment

    • @Nathan-gd7xq
      @Nathan-gd7xq 5 років тому +1

      @@karmicobsession1636 but not the scholarship

    • @karmicobsession1636
      @karmicobsession1636 5 років тому +7

      Nathan Allen which he took from a actual black student just as qualified simply because he got to it first and they hadn’t given it away yet

    • @dantegood2195
      @dantegood2195 5 років тому +4

      Mogen David he definitely got “special treatment” from law enforcement. The American way!

  • @amartinjoe
    @amartinjoe 2 роки тому +3

    this was a funny movie - especially the basketball scene. I laughed so hard during that scene. I didn't care much for the drama. I was a kid in the 80s and I didn't think too much of the racial undertones - I mean, who cares ? It's a comedy.

  • @drebone1986
    @drebone1986 3 роки тому +7

    Let me be the real black in the comments:
    Why is James Earl Jones in this, you can't be in a movie about blackface and then give us a lecture on life
    Yes I saw it, I wish I didn't but we all saw it more than once, once on TV as a child and later in life as a refresher of wtf did I just watch 🤣
    Why not just never go to school period, if you're going in blackface clearly you don't need to be here
    Why do they do every stereotype possible as if he gets a pass because he has a tan, a tan isn't Black and even if he was he'd still get checked for it
    The girl in this married this guy in real life right after this film wrapped, look it up
    Siskel and Ebert wanted more out of a movie about blackface, they wanted more romance and aha moments in this insensitive comedy where a man is literally abusing a system meant to help minorities because they were being denied an education
    EVERYBODY BELIEVES HE'S BLACK SMH, nobody once questions it or knows ever without him telling them one by one, even his parents don't know it's him, he never changes a thing about himself but his skin color to tan and suddenly he's:
    A threat
    A savage
    A Pimp
    Pro Athlete
    A dancer
    Musician
    Thief
    Movie ends like all movies of the 80s where nobody learned a thing and nobody was punished for it, the situation somehow magically worked itself out in the end regardless of whether the protagonist did something or not

    • @jedijones
      @jedijones 3 роки тому +1

      Why in the world can someone not be "in a movie about blackface?" Stop being a censor and telling us what a movie can or cannot be about. Like Ebert said, he thought it was a fantastic premise. It sounded like he thought it could lead to a good exploration of social issues. A white person could understand what it's like to live as a black person for a day. Can you not see how that could be educational for everyone in the audience? Instead you're whining about "blackface." Stop being such a pearl-clutcher who's offended by things that don't hurt anybody. Also, "blackface" refers to a specific type of exaggerated makeup that hasn't been used in entertainment in a hundred years or so. Someone putting on makeup to try and look like a real person of a different race is not "blackface." Being offended by that makes zero sense at all. it just represents a complete confusion about what "blackface" is.

    • @drebone1986
      @drebone1986 3 роки тому +3

      @@jedijones if you needed Soul Man to learn about the plight of black people then I feel sorry for the whites that did and it is too blackface because the whole point was to portray another race in comedic fashion which the film does multiple times, just because he does it mostly in fantasies doesn't mean it's not being done and what are you saying he's trans racial because that's not what he's saying, he knows he's exploiting a system in the guise of another race and could care less when it's all over, the man only wanted to go to college to please his parents and dropped the act as soon as he was done so I'm very confused about why when Hollywood cleans it up from the minstrel shows of the 1800s that now suddenly I'm supposed to be like at least they're learning give it a pass?

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому +1

      Yeah, it was just another broad comedy

    • @cockoffgewgle4993
      @cockoffgewgle4993 2 роки тому

      You’re offended by “blackface” but not the systemic racism against whites that necessitated the blackface?

    • @theessentials450
      @theessentials450 8 місяців тому +1

      They can make whatever they want.. just do good

  • @stretcheasy3506
    @stretcheasy3506 8 років тому +16

    face look like melting wax

  • @YouCantHoldOnTooLong
    @YouCantHoldOnTooLong 13 років тому +3

    This movie was hysterically funny!!! How the hell could Siskel and Ebert not like this movie?? They've given thumbs down to some movies which most critics on average would have given thumbs up to. I sometimes just don't understand these two.
    ~Dutch

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому +3

      It’s because the movie was written purely for cheap laughs, no thought or wit was put into it whatsoever. They are right, especially Ebert. It was a missed opportunity.

  • @vickigraves859
    @vickigraves859 5 років тому +1

    Called a Catch 22 before we "got it all"...

  • @kevingalloway7585
    @kevingalloway7585 3 роки тому +1

    LCD images that hide the true form of what you see. I've seen the true form.....cartoonish monsters is how I would describe them. Not Human!!!!!

  • @Drjackdempsey9644
    @Drjackdempsey9644 2 роки тому +1

    This movie was funny as hell people are too sensitive. In the 80s everybody thought this movie was funny including black people. The only people that are offended by this movie are racists. Or Spike Lee (known racist) who said the scholarship should’ve went to a black person. Why do we have scholarships for black people? That’s stupid. Scholarships should be based on merit and he had the grades, sorry snowflakes but that’s the way it should be. The movie was funny and it was 1986

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому +1

      It pandered to the lowest common denominator though like a bad sitcom. That makes its use of blackface repellant rather than any bit clever. Also, to your question about affirmative action, as Martin Luther King, Jr once said, “A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro.”

  • @KodytheRedFox
    @KodytheRedFox 7 років тому +1

    There's no filmstrip graphic with the movie title's name graphic on it in this review.

  • @Tr0nzoid
    @Tr0nzoid 12 років тому +9

    This movie exposed me to the dumb stereotypes in the world.

    • @bobthebear1246
      @bobthebear1246 6 років тому +4

      Tr0nzoid And also to horrible filmmaking.

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 Рік тому +2

      @@bobthebear1246 I agree. This was not done particularly smart. It basically used blackface largely for cheap laughs rather than anything consistently of real substance. Had the movie been approached more intellectually and thoughtfully, it might have been a lot better than it was. As it stands, it’s just a dumb comedy that uses blackface in no less a repellant manner than how it was used in vaudeville.

  • @realityisawasteland
    @realityisawasteland 3 роки тому +1

    A Must Watch Movie. It's Comedy and nothing less.

    • @marcel1372
      @marcel1372 2 роки тому

      Yes 🤡 👍

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому

      That makes its use of blackface repellant rather than any bit clever.

  • @snarkus63
    @snarkus63 12 років тому +12

    Gawd,what a horrible film.
    Oh,well.At least Hollywood won't ever try anything like this again---like,say,oh,I don't know,uh,two black cops in their 30s who go undercover as,uh,aaaaaas,uh...two white teenage girls!I mean,who's be stupid enough to make something like that?!?

    • @LivforSun
      @LivforSun 6 років тому +2

      haha they did in tropic thunder, and white chicks {gender offensive as well}

    • @DJRitty
      @DJRitty 5 років тому +2

      @@LivforSun Funny both times.

    • @Lexman509
      @Lexman509 3 роки тому +1

      People actually thought White Chicks was funny? I'm outta here. :)

    • @darrenkey207
      @darrenkey207 3 роки тому

      @@Lexman509 White chicks had a lot of funny moments that people still reference to this day. Yes it was funny, just not very good

  • @Rom-ju5tf
    @Rom-ju5tf 2 роки тому +1

    Siskel and ebert??? More like Pixel and ebert

  • @noneofyourbusiness1553
    @noneofyourbusiness1553 8 років тому +5

    2:25 Trypophobia on blast

  • @mcboltron
    @mcboltron 23 дні тому

    is that Ron Reagan?

  • @linkbiff1054
    @linkbiff1054 7 років тому +2

    They morph into lizards

  • @morgan8757
    @morgan8757 11 років тому +4

    it soumds like thier givin it two thumbs down

  • @Cutecrusher25
    @Cutecrusher25 7 років тому

    ...was this by the same guys who made SCP-1981?

  • @AnonymousAccount514
    @AnonymousAccount514 3 роки тому

    love this movie

  • @WaitingtoHit
    @WaitingtoHit 12 років тому

    So you preferred him as a drunk?

  • @Supremmo
    @Supremmo 11 місяців тому

    I dunno. The movie didn't offend me. I found nothing wrong with it and I got the fact that they were poking fun at stereotypes, racism and white privilege. I thought it was a comedy with a message.

  • @timburr4453
    @timburr4453 7 місяців тому

    this was a great film

  • @hotatp
    @hotatp Місяць тому

    Shush! This movies hilarious

  • @pickuptruck8802
    @pickuptruck8802 Рік тому

    Idc about this films “good intentions” It’s just not the same imagine if spike lee made a film about a chris rock pretending to be a Jewish boy trying to get to a trip to birthright? Would’ve never seen the light of day.

  • @anonb4632
    @anonb4632 4 роки тому

    Prof. Jessica Krug's inspiration.

  • @ShyGuy83
    @ShyGuy83 4 роки тому

    Watching this in 1986: 😖 Oh, dear God why?
    Watching this in 2020: 😕 Meh, still less offensive than Rachael Dolezal.

  • @mikec.9130
    @mikec.9130 7 років тому +3

    I wish these two mojoz would try to make a movie. It aint easy as it loooks.....

    • @doyourealize7477
      @doyourealize7477 7 років тому +5

      That's not how art works. Art moves forward by its critics and to say that you can't critique because you don't create is just stupid. Think about this for anything at all. If you are not a professional chef are you not allowed to critique the food at a fancy restaurant for being below your expectations? If the prose of a novel is boring, are you not allowed to say anything since you're not a writer? Your argument is lame and has been passed along by shallow thinking philistines for many years.

    • @jstarr7506
      @jstarr7506 5 років тому

      They're both dead

    • @dantegood2195
      @dantegood2195 5 років тому +1

      Mike C. With that attitude, I hope you never have an opinion on anything then.

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому

      That’s no excuse to make movies, even comedies, that just try to shock for cheap laughs like this clearly did rather than try to approach it with any actual intellect.

  • @ed_ward6869
    @ed_ward6869 7 років тому +10

    This movie is so accurate today.

    • @mastermonarch
      @mastermonarch 7 років тому +4

      In what way?

    • @ed_ward6869
      @ed_ward6869 7 років тому +6

      mastermonarch there are a bunch of people who pretend to be a certain race just because the colleges look for diversity.

    • @tochiRTA
      @tochiRTA 4 роки тому

      that's how it is. True edgy material (not pretend-edgy) is always ahead of the curve and rattles some cages. Then people realize that it was actually brilliant.

    • @liamgallagherful
      @liamgallagherful 4 роки тому +4

      Elizabeth Warren 😂 Rachel Dolezal. Hell, gender identity!

    • @HardKore5250
      @HardKore5250 4 роки тому

      BLM

  • @kewkabe
    @kewkabe Рік тому

    Barack Obama entered Harvard Law school just a couple years after this movie was made. I wonder if he encountered the same things as a white-acting, white-sounding, raised-in-white-family person but with black skin?

  • @Chasstful
    @Chasstful 4 роки тому +5

    This movie was such a disaster it caused all sorts of collateral damage. It was the end of C Thomas Howell's hopes for an A or even B list career. Its did the same to Rae Dong Chong. It was offensive AND above all an awful movie.

    • @babybird871
      @babybird871 4 роки тому

      it did well at the box office..not sure if affected their careers they weren`t exactly "A" list actors before or after...it was released by New World pictures which was famous for "B" movies..

    • @Chasstful
      @Chasstful 4 роки тому +1

      @@babybird871 C Thomas Howell had been receiving lead roles in well known, popular teen comedies like 'Secret Admirer', as well as prominent roles in iconic films like 'Red Dawn' and 'The Outsiders'. Without going on IMBd, I can't think of a single lead role in any known film after that. Very similar results or Rae Dong Chong. So, maybe they weren't yet A listers but their careers were on the rise before Soul Man. Its not an uncommon story in Hollywood, Bombs or offensive movies cause collateral damage.

    • @babybird871
      @babybird871 4 роки тому +2

      Secret Admirer wasn`t very successful. I remember him later in Gettysburg..and as a good not great actor..a lot of actors in that area never become solid leads.. The only other film I remember Rae Chong in was Commando.

    • @darrenkey207
      @darrenkey207 3 роки тому

      @@babybird871 she was in Beat Street

  • @Kruppt808
    @Kruppt808 3 роки тому +2

    missed chances on a shitty movie.

  • @BarryJowers
    @BarryJowers 7 років тому +8

    SJW's would consider this movie racist now

    • @LivforSun
      @LivforSun 6 років тому

      and gender offensive

    • @tesuanseylink
      @tesuanseylink 6 років тому +19

      It was racist then.

    • @karmicobsession1636
      @karmicobsession1636 6 років тому +14

      plenty of folks thought it was racist back then actually. People hated it.

    • @scottjulie27
      @scottjulie27 5 років тому +1

      I would love to know what "SJW's" consider proper humor for us since they are such experts in perfection.

    • @dantegood2195
      @dantegood2195 5 років тому +4

      scottjulie27 pretty hilarious how conservatives find that want to stigmatize people who seek justice for all. Wanting social justice...how evil! It’s not like it’s in our founding doctrine or anything “liberty and justice for all”

  • @futuremovieactor
    @futuremovieactor 2 роки тому

    Based on the Double Toasted Bad Movie Roast, this film looks embarrassing.

  • @345mrse
    @345mrse 5 місяців тому

    These dolts! If they wanted gravitas and profound satire then watch a Spike Lee movie from that era.

  • @_DrDrakeRamoray
    @_DrDrakeRamoray 4 роки тому

    Gene's brain tumor was full on this point so he like the rest of the 80's didn't think this was a racist movie.

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому +1

      It’s ultimately racist because the idea is played purely for laughs and cheap, lowest-common-denominator ones at that.

  • @XavierKatzone
    @XavierKatzone 4 роки тому +1

    It's a great, funny, insightful multi-layered film.

    • @RocStarr913
      @RocStarr913 2 роки тому +1

      Hardly. It looked like many movies made for its age group, especially the comedies.

  • @sha11235
    @sha11235 6 років тому +3

    This film sucked.

  • @sbtbfanatic
    @sbtbfanatic 12 років тому +4

    Soul Man was hilarious! Siskel and Ebert are too tight-assed to get the humor. This movie shows how blacks get handouts in the form of Affirmative Action. Hopefully our nation's lawmakers see Soul Man and finally outlaw Affirmative Action!

    • @karmicobsession1636
      @karmicobsession1636 6 років тому +15

      if thats all you got from the film well no wonder some people hate it and racists tend to love it.

    • @adbc1f72
      @adbc1f72 5 років тому +7

      sbtbfanatic
      What do you think of that statement now. Since Lori Laughlin, Felicity Huffman and others are being taken down because of paying for special slots for they’re children in athletics to go to Ivy League Universities. White privilege all the way around. Hum....

    • @seabassseabass8835
      @seabassseabass8835 5 років тому +3

      😆😆😆😆😆
      What a racist idiot 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @relaxationstation7374
      @relaxationstation7374 4 роки тому +1

      Speaking of handouts, how on Earth did all of the German, Dutch and Swedish immigrants come up with hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland in the midwest corn belt, they sure didn't buy it?

    • @tochiRTA
      @tochiRTA 4 роки тому +1

      troll comment