Roger Ebert

[El Bracamonti]

i don't know if you consider him a celeb or not, but i figure i'd give it a shot. roger ebert.........even though i think he has no good taste in comedies, i still value his opinion. what do the rest of you think?

[Moviefan1234]

Arguably the greatest film reviewer in history. A man who I don't always agree with, but who I respect greatly.

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Events/0823-spi/ebertrog.er1

[BorderEevilIII]

sometimes I wanna throw something at the TV when he dogs a movie I like but other than that he comes to mind of well known movie critics.

[vtadave]

I'd hit it.

[Scarface98.9]

I'd guess he gets a YAY from me. We don't always agree, but be backs himself up well, and his show is pretty entertaining sometimes

[JCPhoenix]

Yay. I respect his opinion quite a bit, and I go to his site quite often to check out what he thinks of movies...HOWEVER, there are times when I want to throw something at him...examples?

-His review for Life of David Gale...basically, he gave it ZERO stars (that's rite, ZERO) for giving out a message he didn't agree with...I mean, ok, if he doesn't agree with the movie fine, but ZERO STARS just for that?!....

-His review for Mulholland Drive...in which he gave it FOUR stars (out of four) and said that he loved it despite it being random..." "Mulholland Drive" isn't like "Memento," where if you watch it closely enough, you can hope to explain the mystery. There is no explanation. There may not even be a mystery." I also clearly remember a line he said about random images thrown together, but I read the review again and it seems to be missing. But i swear i remember that line being in there...but seriously, I love Mulholland Drive, but he gave it FOUR stars when he thought it didn't make any sense at all!! i think that's a little weird and perhaps he was just saying he liked it because everyone else was saying it was great...(is it me or is he trying to be all arty and shit nowadays, his top ten choices are...arty...not that there's anything wrong with art films but he goes sort of extreme...)

-His review for Usual Suspects...he basically didn't get the movie (how hard is it to get?) so he gave it 2 out of 4. Weird.

-Shawshank Redemption...I mean come on, he gives Shawshank 2 out of 4 but then proceeds and gives Frank Darabont's next movie The Majestic (which was *clearly* nowhere near as good as Shawshank) 3 1/2 out of 4??? Majestic was a very schmaltzy movie that was just a little over the top. I didn't mind it, there were some parts I really really enjoyed in it but there is no way it is better than Shawshank...

But other than that, I agree with him on several occasions (about 60% of the time around?)...and even on movies that i liked that he didn't, he sometimes has some very valid points to make.

[Michael_myers]

YAY. he seems to stay on my good side enough, but the bastard pisses all over To Kill a Mockingbird, yet he considers This is Spinal Tap a great movie. He backs himself reasonably well, and is much better than that hairy guy on the internet. Hes cool.... most of the time.

[Cyclonus]

@ JCPhoenix

Ebert gave The Shawshank Redemption (http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/1994/09/941998.html) (***1/2), the same rating he gave to The Majestic (http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/2001/12/122106.html) and The Green Mile (http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/1999/12/121004.html).

[Slim]

Originally posted by vtadave
I'd hit it.

No, I don't think I'd do that. He isn't that good looking in my opinion. :D

Anyway, Ebert provides some interesting reviews to read. Sometimes his reasoning isn't quite so sound, if you know what I mean. When he lets some unnecessary personal feelings interfere with the film evaluation. I tend to disagree completely most of the time. So a mild nay from me.

[Jon Lyrik]

The man is the ultimate movie critic. I don't always agree with him, but with his DVD commentaries, his witty reviews, and his generally good taste, YAY!

[JCPhoenix]

Originally posted by Cyclonus
@ JCPhoenix

Ebert gave The Shawshank Redemption (http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/1994/09/941998.html) (***1/2), the same rating he gave to The Majestic (http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/2001/12/122106.html) and The Green Mile (http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/1999/12/121004.html).

my bad. i was a bit tired when i wrote that up.

[ilovemovies]

Originally posted by JCPhoenix



-His review for Usual Suspects...he basically didn't get the movie (how hard is it to get?) so he gave it 2 out of 4. Weird.



Actually I'm pretty sure he gave the movie * 1/2. And, even though I loved it, his criticism of the movie were valid.


Anyway I say YAY. Greatest Film Critic ever! I never miss him and Reoper's show.

[JCPhoenix]

Originally posted by ilovemovies
Actually I'm pretty sure he gave the movie * 1/2. And, even though I loved it, his criticism of the movie were valid.


Anyway I say YAY. Greatest Film Critic ever! I never miss him and Reoper's show.

WTF?! I was certain when i first went there to Almost Famous and Usual Suspects several months ago it was 2 out of 4 and 4 out of 4...but now i just went back and it is 1 1/2 out of 4 for usual suspects...i dunno but maybe my brain's frazzled :p first this and shawshank...oh well.

the sad thing is that his review basically states he didn't like the ending and that's about it...it's because he didn't like the ending he didn't like the movie...i didn't see very many other valid points. He says he felt the ending was too manipulative and this was his main reason for giving it 1 1/2? He didn't talk about much of the rest of the movie either, whether he liked it or not. It's sad that he would rate it just on that, similar to his blind hatred of Life of David Gale quite simply because it was against his beliefs...he didn't even rate it it on acting (which he said was excellent) or storyline etc...while i can understand how someone's own views can play a major role in their review i do think he was too extreme (ZERO STARS!!) in his ratings.

oh, and i'll reiterate the fact that i do agree with him a lot on several occasions. just that these are the few reviews that stand out where I don't agree with the way he reviewed the movies.

I also go to James Berardinelli's site a lot, though I disagree with him more than Ebert...but I never have problems with the way Berardinelli reviews movies, if he rates a movie badly, he always has valid reasons to some extent.

[ilovemovies]

Originally posted by JCPhoenix
WTF?! I was certain when i first went there to Almost Famous and Usual Suspects several months ago it was 2 out of 4 and 4 out of 4...but now i just went back and it is 1 1/2 out of 4 for usual suspects...i dunno but maybe my brain's frazzled :p first this and shawshank...oh well.

the sad thing is that his review basically states he didn't like the ending and that's about it...it's because he didn't like the ending he didn't like the movie...i didn't see very many other valid points. He says he felt the ending was too manipulative and this was his main reason for giving it 1 1/2? He didn't talk about much of the rest of the movie either, whether he liked it or not. It's sad that he would rate it just on that, similar to his blind hatred of Life of David Gale quite simply because it was against his beliefs...he didn't even rate it it on acting (which he said was excellent) or storyline etc...while i can understand how someone's own views can play a major role in their review i do think he was too extreme (ZERO STARS!!) in his ratings.

oh, and i'll reiterate the fact that i do agree with him a lot on several occasions. just that these are the few reviews that stand out where I don't agree with the way he reviewed the movies.

I also go to James Berardinelli's site a lot, though I disagree with him more than Ebert...but I never have problems with the way Berardinelli reviews movies, if he rates a movie badly, he always has valid reasons to some extent.

I haven't read the review in long time but from what I remember what he said was that the movie is hard to follow (which I didn't think it was but that's just me) and after awhile he just gave up. But it turned out it didn't matter anyway as the ending kind of negates the rest of the movie before it. He's not the only one who felt the ending was a cheat. I've read a few reviews who didn't like the ending either. I personally didn't felt cheated at all. I thought, infact, it was brilliant. But I guess if you've spent a lot of the movie trying to figure it out and try and pay attention then some people felt cheated by the ending but they're paying attention was for naught.

[Madeline]

I have an *unhealthy* obsession with Ebert. :o

Well, really, I just love reading his reviews in print at suntimes.com. I don't always agree with him but darn it, he reviews so well that I can see where he's coming from.

[bob]

Originally posted by JCPhoenix

-Shawshank Redemption...I mean come on, he gives Shawshank 2 out of 4 but then proceeds and gives Frank Darabont's next movie The Majestic (which was *clearly* nowhere near as good as Shawshank) 3 1/2 out of 4??? Majestic was a very schmaltzy movie that was just a little over the top. I didn't mind it, there were some parts I really really enjoyed in it but there is no way it is better than Shawshank...


Shawshank Sucks!!!

Now back to scheduled posting...

I'll give Ebert a Yay. His "Great Movies" book cements how awesome his taste in film is, and he's a surprisingly witty guy. Head on over to his site and read about his battle with Vincent Gallo. His response to Gallo calling him fat is priceless....

[Jerk Shapiro]

...I wonder how he'd rate me in bed...

[BorderEevilIII]

Originally posted by MOVIE-Maniac 8
...I wonder how he'd rate me in bed...

mmm ponders that thought.......

well ru (Jim)Jason Biggs .....

(The Stifler) Sean William Scott......

or ("Finch") Eddie Kaye Thomas.......

[SLAW]

Originally posted by MOVIE-Maniac 8
...I wonder how he'd rate me in bed...

Can't quite recommend it, but he had a certain fondness for it.

[Psychocandy]

YAY...

He's the only critic whose opinion I respect 100% even when it flies in the face of my own opinion. Oh...and i'm a horror movie junkie and he's a helluva a lot more open to that particular genre's charms than most mainstream critics.

[Hannibal21]

YAY. We do disagree on a few movies but I really do enjoy reading his reviews, no doubt one of the best movie critics around.

[notchreturns]

He's a YAY. Don't always agree with the man, especially recently, but he always writes great reviews and backs up his opinions.

[flowrchild]

I give a Yay to Ebert. Although I don't always agree with his opinions, I do think he writes good reviews explaining his viewpoints eloquently. He is a guy who loves movies, just like us.

[The Lolo]

Ebert rocks my world. I like watching him on his show Ebert & Roeper because you always understand why he's giving the film a thumbs up or thumbs down. Not to mention it's funny watching him argue with Roeper. :)