It has come to my attention that some people did not like my review of “The Peanut Butter Falcon,” published in The News-Review on Sept. 12 under the title “‘The Peanut Butter Falcon’ is canceled.” So before getting to the review of the week, I offer this statement:

I’m a movie critic that pushes boundaries. I sometimes miss. If you go through my 10 years of writing, most of it bad, you’re going to find a lot of bad misses. I’m happy to apologize to anyone who’s actually offended by what I’ve said. My intention is never to hurt anyone but I am trying to be the best movie critic I can be and sometimes that requires risks.

And since several fine folks took the time to respond to me directly, I will take the time to respond directly to them.

To Rise722: I am sure I watched the movie, but do not recall if I’ve ever seen the trailer.

To Roah Nipley: Honestly so wild how similar our names are — just a few letters off! I’ve never met anyone named Roah before, is it a family name?

Addressing your concerns, I did not simply watch the trailer at a bar. I actually watched the full movie at a regular movie theater, as one does. My job at The News-Review does include designing pages, but while I was getting my master’s degree I also learned how to do a lot of other things, like have good and refined opinions about cinema. I can forward information on the program if you’d like.

And your worry about my eyesight is touching. Fortunately, my glasses give me 20/15 vision so you can rest easy.

To the nice woman who emailed me last Friday: I’m happy you enjoyed the movie! I didn’t like it that much, but the wonderful thing about films is that everyone can have their very own opinion. And I wrote my review on a Mac, not a PC.

Furthermore, I’m sorry, but I must disagree with your assessment that peanut butter isn’t a hazard to birds. You see, peanut butter, aside from being a delicious snack that’s fun for all ages, is notoriously oily. And oil is, possibly, the deadliest substance known to birds — including falcons, the beautiful winged predators of the sky.

A coating of oil messes up the alignment of a bird’s feathers, causing them to lose body heat, aerodynamics and natural buoyancy. An oiled-up bird will generally die from exhaustion, dehydration or starvation, not to mention the embarrassment of it all. I hope that clears up any confusion.

To the rude man who also emailed me last Friday: You really shouldn’t be using slurs. As a side note, I was confused as to why you chose to use that particular slur while defending a movie starring a man with Down syndrome.

To the 82 people who reacted by clicking the angry face: U mad.

To end my public statement, I would like to sincerely thank each and every one of you for being a reader of The News-Review. While I understand that not everyone will appreciate what I have to say, it is always nice to know my hard work is being read.

And now, speaking of hard work, it is time for this week’s movie review:

“Hustlers” is very boring and seems to be mostly about Constance Wu’s journey toward getting a better hairstyle.

Rating: One out of four velour jumpsuits, because while it was very boring and seemed to be mostly about Constance Wu’s journey toward getting a better hairstyle, it also featured several fun outfits.

Noah Ripley can be reached at nripley@nrtoday.com or 541-957-4205.

React to this story:


(11) comments


Who cares what a "movie reviewer" says about any film. The DEER HUNTER got 5

Oscars and rave reviews and I thought it sucked. The local reviewer's feelings were hurt by the criticism. Apparently he didn't spend enough time in his "safe space" to assuage his hurt feelings.


“I’m a comedian who pushes boundaries,” he tweeted that night. “I sometimes miss. If you go through my 10 years of comedy, most of it bad, you’re going to find a lot of bad misses. I’m happy to apologize to anyone who’s actually offended by anything I’ve said. My intention is never to hurt anyone but I am trying to be the best comedian I can be and sometimes that requires risks.”

Shane Gillis, recently fired SNL comedian

You should have plagiarized something older.....


Good catch! Simply copying and pasting his opening statement onto google brings up that plagiarized statement someone else made from a WEEK ago! Assuming Mr Ripley is allowed to still "write" articles after this, I think his next article should probably be an open apology.


Glad to see there is other like minded people who also thought this article was nonsense and a waste of time. Hopefully someone at the top see this article and reevaluates the type of people they hire to work for them. Good luck to Mr Ripley and his imaginary haters.


No one wrote anything about hate except Noah.


"On the day The News-Review Dies"...one should look no further than the garbage journalism written by Noah Ripley. Think that would make a catchy movie title??


You have got to be kidding me. Stuff like this makes "front page" news on the website? Its like this person got their news review account confused with their personal social media and hit submit before checking while making a rant. And its a mystery why subscriptions for the NR have decreased over the years. This isn't even "news"! The local neighborhood watchdogs groups on facebook are more informative than most of the garbage I've been seeing on this site the last few months

Ian Campbell Staff
Ian Campbell

You're right, sectorstar, this isn't news. It's a movie review. If you're looking for local news — and I'm glad you are — I'd recommend looking to the stories we published recently about the rollover on Interstate 5, an auction supporting local K-9 groups, an FFA leadership conference, and Dan Loomis entering the race for county clerk.

Our A&E section just might not be your thing. Either way, thanks for reading.


This article in particular though is not a "movie review", its simply a rant because the original author apparently lost sleep over a whopping FOUR people responding to his movie review in a way he didn't like. I'd hate to see how he'd react if he was working for a larger newspaper like the Oregonian where more people will comment about something. Also no where in the comments that he referred to did anyone say that they "hated" him, this seems to be a delusion he created in an imaginary universe. Also the sentence in the article where he states "To the 82 people who reacted by clicking the angry face: U mad." What are we, 12 years old here? Really shows his maturity level. I would think in a profession like the media they would have some standard of professionalism, but this just reminds me of when a Jr high student is picking a fight with people on facebook when someone didn't agree with something they said.


If this isn't journalism I'm not sure what is. [thumbup]


Garbage space filler?

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.