[Brazelton] RIP Roger Ebert
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
- Status
He certainly wasn't getting any younger and I know the cancer did a real number on him the first time around. I guess it was inevitable. 
I loved watching Ebert when I was a kid. I thought he was the luckiest dude in the world b/c of his job.
I'm pretty upset. I jabbed my finger in my eye at work and claimed I had something in it* and ran off to compose myself. Ugh. He really helped me get into movies and care about what made them tick and what made them work and not work.
*it was sadness
*it was sadness
Ebert was one of the few "big" reviewers who didn't see guilty pleasure movies as something to actually feel guilty about. Just movies for a different moment that need to be judged on their own scale and their own merits. Not because they needed a "dumbed-down scale" but because the merits on which they needed to be judged were different. And he was fine and supportive of that.
Damn, I really will miss him.
Damn, I really will miss him.
At least I was already planning to go to a movie tonight
Man, I fucking loved Roger Ebert. I didn't already agree on his opinion of movies, but I sure as hell respected him, and thought he was among the best in the business.
I loved reading his reviews. His love of cinema was infectious. He'll be severely missed.
Dammit, why couldn't it have been Gene Shalit?
I loved reading his reviews. His love of cinema was infectious. He'll be severely missed.
Dammit, why couldn't it have been Gene Shalit?
I did have some issues with him in tastes, but he was a solid reviewer, that did not attack a film needlessly. Like how so many critics search for insults to use as headlines for their reviews.
I might not've agreed with him on everything , but I'd be lying if I said I'm not sad he's gone. Guy was a damn legend and an inspiration to critics everywhere.
Here's a reason why Ebert was one of the greats: He actually wrote a few movies (I think maybe under a pseudonym?) so he, more than most critics, actually had knowledge of what it takes to make a movie. I think that played into his judgement of film quite a bit. He understood how damn hard it is to make a good movie.
This sucks. Especially after he had beaten the cancer, only for it to come back. He was one of the greats and like others, I appreciate how he didn't shit on fun movies just because they weren't Oscar bait.
He did, however, shit on movies that deserved to be shit on.
Whenever I would be on Rotten Tomatoes, the first thing I would do on a movie is click top critics. I would then immediately scan for his face to see his opinion first. Rotten Tomatoes is useless now.
I'm gonna miss Roger Ebert.
One of my favorite pieces he wrote, all about how Transformers 2 is awful.
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/06/the_fall_of_the_revengers.html
I especially like his comments on the comments.
I'm calling absolute bullshit on this. You don't have to be an artist to be a critic.
Are you saying that generally speaking, or are you specifically saying that Eberts work as a screenwriter did not in any way positively affect his success as a critic?
I think you can be absolutely great at criticism without having done what you criticize. Be it painting, sculpting, movies, food, architecture, whatever.
Of course, yes, specifically, knowing this process and having gone through it does help. But I really don't like the idea that you HAVE to do it to be a great.
Actually re-reading the original comment, he said it was A reason and not THE reason, so that's a distinction.
You can call it whatever you want but thats not what I said or meant.
I suppose to make it clearer I should have said "actually had the experience of what it takes to make a movie..."
That help?
Cajungal
Staff member
I never read much of his work. I read a little when I heard he died, and I also watched this clip:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/the-time-roger-ebert-told-off-congress
What an interesting person. I thoroughly enjoyed his reviews as well. I'm sorry I didn't know him better before. RIP
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/the-time-roger-ebert-told-off-congress
What an interesting person. I thoroughly enjoyed his reviews as well. I'm sorry I didn't know him better before. RIP
I don't agree with this at all. I think it's entirely possible to have an appreciation and understanding of a medium to be able to accurately critique it without having produced something in that medium.
And I feel the exact opposite. It's like telling a waiter he's terrible at his job when you've never done it. You have no idea if he has other tables at the other end of the restaurant and you're a favor he's doing for management. You have no idea if the cooks messed up the order and not him putting in the order. You're just mad because the service wasn't exactly what you wanted and you're sitting there thinking to yourself: -Waiting tables is so easy, I don't understand why he's so terrible at it-
I realize that's not an exact analogy but it lends to the point that if you don't know what goes into the process, you can't really understand the full meaning of the outcome/results. Can you APPRECIATE the results? Sure. Can you critique them? Sure. Will they be as meaningful as someone who's been through the process? Nope.
Yeah I just completely disagree with literally everything you've said in this thread, sorry
- Status