|
Re-reading his review of Human Centipede is still pretty great. Ebert simply has a voice that no other critic can really replicate. http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-human-centipede-2010
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:36 |
|
|
CaptainHollywood posted:Re-reading his review of Human Centipede is still pretty great. Ebert simply has a voice that no other critic can really replicate. His reviews of the second is even better, as if that film were specifically made as a challenge for him. http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-human-centipede-2-full-sequence-2011 He also picked it as the worst film of 2011 without question.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:If I recall correctly, I believe he declared Hitman to be the best video-game-to-film adaptation he had seen, which is saying a lot. Ebert liked them big ol' titties, for sure. Also liked the brown sugar. There's his wife (now widow  ), and the man used to date Oprah!Drunkboxer posted:I liked his review of I Spit On Your Grave where he essentially just looked around the theater in disgust at the people who were enjoying themselves. K. Waste posted:Which is interesting because Roger Ebert made a name for himself as someone who would review the '42nd. street' stuff and give it legitimate standing against mainstream Hollywood films and foreign art pictures. My most frustrated moments with Ebert are those where his tastes and views seem inconsistent and random. The one that comes most to mind the most is the Star Wars prequel trilogy: Ebert loved Episode I, overlooking its shortcomings and enjoying being immersed in its sci-fi fantasy universe. Fair enough, but then he let Episode II have it for the very same shortcomings it shared with Episode I. Then, with Episode III he was back to giving high marks for its imagination and developed universe, handwaving away (though outlining) a lot of its dubious deficiencies. There is NOT a very discernable difference in quality or... pretty much anything between these three movies and I find it a little baffling how he can love two of them but go "yeah, THAT one was a stinker" for the other, especially when the reviews themselves don't make much of an effort to qualify the seemingly irreconcilable opinions. I understand Ebert like any human is going to react to things differently depending on the day and whatever mood he's in, but I seem to run into that with him more than any other reviewer I've read. Honestly, in the Star Wars prequel case I think there was some politics involved. Ebert clearly had a bone to pick over digital projection and seemed to want to 'punish' Episode II or make an example out of it in order to rant about DLP, and then when Episode III I almost sense he gave it higher marks in order to compensate for a somewhat disingenuous review of the prior film - his Episode III review is pretty unenthusiastic for a movie he apparently loved... Finally, I know it's a SISKEL & Ebert thread and not just an Ebert thread, but I'm nowhere near as familiar with Siskel (and I suspect that's the case for a great many folks). It's a shame his reviews aren't more public. It's hard to believe who ever has the rights to them is just sitting on them, they would definitely make a decent return in book sales and online ad revenue. Or is it a 'nobody really knows who owns it' legal limbo kind of thing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
If there's a well-written analysis of the big differences between Ebert and Siskel's opinions of movies (if it could be adequately summarized), I'd like to see it. Preferably something based on their written reviews rather than their TV reviews.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Ebert was a Grade A Breast Man. quote:"Rapa Nui" slips through the National Geographic Loophole. This is the Hollywood convention which teaches us that brown breasts are not as sinful as white ones, and so while it may be evil to gaze upon a blond Playboy centerfold and feel lust in our hearts, it is educational to watch Polynesian maidens frolicking topless in the surf. This isn't sex; it's geography. Russ Meyer once got Ebert a hooker, and when the hooker asked what he wanted, Ebert said "Everything but the poo poo and piss." Good man.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:If there's a well-written analysis of the big differences between Ebert and Siskel's opinions of movies (if it could be adequately summarized), I'd like to see it. Preferably something based on their written reviews rather than their TV reviews. They've stated in several interviews (and a rather strange talk show appearance where a psychologists tries to get into their heads) that Ebert's written reviews tend to be more personal perspectives based on the emotional intent of a film whereas Siskel's reviews were very point-by-point analytical focussing more on if the plot or characters were acceptable for a movie. Gene's second passion was reporting on sports so that's no surprise for the mindset of how he writes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
caligulamprey posted:Russ Meyer once got Ebert a hooker, and when the hooker asked what he wanted, Ebert said "Everything but the poo poo and piss." Good man. When asked to confirm this, Ebert had this to say: "I could tell you some stories about June Mack, but that one doesn't ring a bell. it sounds more like a scripted line. I think that if I was talking to June Mack in answer to that question, I would've said, 'Tits.'"
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
I thought a couple years back someone uploaded (ABC/Disney maybe?) the archive of At the Movies and you could search by film. Or maybe that was a fan effort.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
Harlock posted:I thought a couple years back someone uploaded (ABC/Disney maybe?) the archive of At the Movies and you could search by film. Or maybe that was a fan effort. Disney used to have all the reviews available in audio format, searchable with thumb ratings on the sides. That site is gone now. Thankfully there is a fan effort at archiving all the video footage of the series here: http://siskelandebert.org/ Not only does the site contain their earlier reviews from Opening Soon and At The Movies (pre Disney), but they also have a lot of interviews, TV appearances and a few of their specific news segment reviews. It's still growing and there are more videos being discovered every now and then. The latest one is from their Holiday Gift Guide in 1987 when they play Duck Hunt: http://siskelandebert.org/video/R659YNK5X7U4/Siskel-amp-Ebert-play-Duck-Hunt-1987
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
When I was growing up in the late 70's/early 80's, Siskel & Ebert were the guys who really peaked my interest in movies. I started watching Sneak Previews on the local PBS affiliate, most likely because it was on after Monty Python and Benny Hill. I used to keep a notebook of their reviews (this was long before the internet, guys) so that when a movie came out on VHS I could look it up and see what they thought of it before shelling out 8 bucks to rent it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
FrostedButts posted:The latest one is from their Holiday Gift Guide in 1987 when they play Duck Hunt: http://siskelandebert.org/video/R659YNK5X7U4/Siskel-amp-Ebert-play-Duck-Hunt-1987 This is hilarious. Roger is kinda just playing through this like someone getting paid to, and then Gene grabs the gun away and rocks it. Dude knows his fake guns.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:This is hilarious. Roger is kinda just playing through this like someone getting paid to, and then Gene grabs the gun away and rocks it. Dude knows his fake guns. I like video games, it sucks we have to wait every 7 years to get a new crop of them...
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
Do you think Roger thought Duck Hunt was art? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:This is hilarious. Roger is kinda just playing through this like someone getting paid to, and then Gene grabs the gun away and rocks it. Dude knows his fake guns. If I remember correctly, Gene also kicked his rear end at Tecmo Bowl and Sega Boxing in other holiday specials. In every holiday special, they always address video games since they were big ticket items, but they were far more interested in the cultural impact. They were shocked at how kids would spend 1-2 hours a day playing video games. Ebert later noted that he played Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles on the NES and found himself addicted to the console anytime he had a free moment. He found it too consuming of his time and ditched the system. At least it wasn't a complete waste of time as he had more righteous napalm to throw on The Wizard, commenting about the inaccuracies of NES games in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
The one video game he claimed to truly love is Cosmology of Kyoto. Reading all he's said about them I honestly think he had more legit taste and critical acumen for video games than almost any game reviewer. Beginning and ending: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ_vdawxXzs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrW54npKP0w Pretty ambitious game, it has a unique and creepy art style and is mostly about you wandering around getting killed and reincarnated repeatedly as you learn more about historical and mythological Kyoto simultaneously. Every person you encounter and almost all the dialogue are period accurate folklore explanations for events that happened in real life, and at almost any time you can click on a reference button for educational information about why these stories came about. Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Nov 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
He even wrote a review of the game it seems: http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/2.09/streetcred.html. Looks and sounds neat. Gonna have to check it out at some point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Raxivace posted:He even wrote a review of the game it seems: http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/2.09/streetcred.html. There was a Lets Play on here about it, but I didn't have the patience to read through it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
This seems as good a place as any to post the time I wrote to Roger Ebert in high school and got exactly the terse, no bullshit reply I deserved: http://www.rogerebert.com/letters/did-i-know-beyond-the-valley-of-the-dolls-was-an-exploitation-film
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:This seems as good a place as any to post the time I wrote to Roger Ebert in high school and got exactly the terse, no bullshit reply I deserved: Here's a great video of Roger reading a column about Beyond the Valley of the Dolls at a tribute to a Chicago columnist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:Siskel: "What about the flatuence jokes? The gas-bag jokes? Did you think those were funny too?" hahahahaha
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
My favorite argument in which Ebert schools Roeper. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYvxIbBifKA Roeper: So if you're standing there in a multiplex and you've got your 9-10 bucks in hand, you're saying you should see The Longest Yard or The Honeymooners instead of War of the Worlds. Ebert: Well, I'm saying-how many times do I have to explain this to you that ratings are relative and not absolute. Roeper: Yeah, ya know, I understand that, I'm just saying. Ebert: I'm saying that if ET gets 4 stars and Close Encounters gets 4 stars this (War of the Worlds) gets 2 stars. Roeper: And The Longest Yard gets thumbs up and this gets thumbs down. Ebert: You know, oddly enough, no. It doesn't work that way. Roeper: Well, how does it not work that way? Ebert: Because people should be smart enough to listen to what we say instead of looking at the dumb thumbs or the dumb stars! Because there are gradations and contexts that are going on! Roeper: So you're giving this thumbs down? Ebert: I am!
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:When asked to confirm this, Ebert had this to say: "I could tell you some stories about June Mack, but that one doesn't ring a bell. it sounds more like a scripted line. I think that if I was talking to June Mack in answer to that question, I would've said, 'Tits.'" Had to Google "June Mack" to see who he was talking about and... 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
FrostedButts posted:My favorite argument in which Ebert schools Roeper.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Had to Google "June Mack" to see who he was talking about and...
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
The only time I've ever been completely baffled by a Roger Ebert review was when he flipped out about the Powerpuff Girls Movie and spent the whole review trashing it because it reminded him of 9/11, but the review itself seems to have vanished into the ether. Well, that and him having Harry Knowles on the show. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5b4HP547E0
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
For those on the fence seeing the recent Fast and the Furious movies just remember... The Fast and The Furious 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJL5RJPLkKY Roeper reviews Fast 5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFBfzh0f_Fg Roeper reviews Fast and Furious 6 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJL5RJPLkKY
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
This is my favorite review of theirs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCOf91smkXU "And no matter what he fires at it, the door doesn't go down. How funny. The door is still there. How hilarious. How highly, highly humorous." I love Siskel responding to Ebert's tirade: "Boy, you're upset. And you know I am too!" B-Hard fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Nov 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
B-Hard posted:This is my favorite review of theirs. I love the way the video degrades so that by the end of his rant, Ebert looks like an alien from They Live.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
I genuinely don't know which was more fun, when Ebert and Siskel would vigorously disagree and go for each other's throats or when they would unanimously tear a movie to shreds it was also, of course, fun when they agreed positively about a movie, like when they both went starry-eyed over Goodfellas
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mp1UbKUAp1o Their tepid uncertainty but quaint pleasure about Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie is also pretty funny. I love how they unpackage it as a commentary on the experience of being 'tortured' by bad movies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljTxOkYp8-8 Sorry for double post but I think I've stumbled upon the greater tribute to Siskel and Ebert.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljTxOkYp8-8 I would have watched a buddy cop show about Siskel and Ebert having to solve a crime each week, but with their disagreement on a film getting in the way of solving the case.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:The only time I've ever been completely baffled by a Roger Ebert review was when he flipped out about the Powerpuff Girls Movie and spent the whole review trashing it because it reminded him of 9/11, but the review itself seems to have vanished into the ether. That's kind of strange, but I wonder if it was some kind of short-lived cultural backlash that I, a teenager who loved the Powerpuff Girls, totally missed? I remember watching the PPG movie in an empty theater and being baffled that apparently it was a failure, when it seemed like the show was really popular.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
It just wasn't something enough people gave enough of a poo poo about to carry a movie. You didn't have kids begging their parents for the latest Powerpuff Girls toys, basically. e: Also the concept of it probably annoyed Ebert in and of itself. I don't think he was terribly kind to Transformers: the Movie, either.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
 Thanks, Random Stranger.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Well, I stole it from the video K. Waste posted, anyway. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
SALT CURES HAM posted:It just wasn't something enough people gave enough of a poo poo about to carry a movie. You didn't have kids begging their parents for the latest Powerpuff Girls toys, basically. With most animated films for kids, Siskel and Ebert usually agreed that it had to meet two requirements. 1. It has to have a moral core. 2. It can't be too depressingly dark. And, in Gene's case, it needed to be Disney. Not having seen their review of Transformers: The Movie, I can tell you they probably trashed it especially since it was one of the last performances of Orson Welles. Say what you will about it being a touchstone of your childhood, it was made specifically, strategically and literally to sell toys without shame or subtlety. And that is a guaranteed thumbs down: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVIJqw64-gA
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
Harime Nui posted:That's kind of strange, but I wonder if it was some kind of short-lived cultural backlash that I, a teenager who loved the Powerpuff Girls, totally missed? I remember watching the PPG movie in an empty theater and being baffled that apparently it was a failure, when it seemed like the show was really popular. Can't say I was really paying close attention at the time but I do remember thinking when the Powerpuff Girls movie was released that it felt like it was about a year or two too late to ride any popularity wave. Also, for kid's animated movies you either have to hit Pokemon-levels of phenomenon, impeccable timing, some other form of crossover appeal (Spongebob Squarepants seem to attract more teens than the usual kid pic, for instance) or all three.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 10:13
|
|
lizardman posted:(Spongebob Squarepants seem to attract more teens than the usual kid pic, for instance) And 75% of those teens are stoned out of their minds.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 10:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:36 |
|
|
SALT CURES HAM posted:And 75% of those teens are stoned out of their minds. That's Roeper's diagnosis anyway. FrostedButts posted:Roeper: The parents like it because it keeps the kids entertained and the college kids like it because I believe they're on drugs! If they actually watch and enjoy this, they must be on drugs!
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 15:19
|
|