Export thread

Man. He just announced yesterday that his cancer had come back and how he would be able to continue only writing about the movies he wanted to. that was damned fast.

Fuck cancer!

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.

This is a real shame. =(

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

Ebert best remembered:

I give cancer 2 thumbs down.

His last communication, time written unknown:

Roger Ebert said:

So on this day of reflection I say again, thank you for going on this journey with me. I'll see you at the movies.

Click to expand...

Man. I loved Ebert. He was top notch all the way and one of the few reviewers I found myself generally agreeing with and trusting. Plus he seems like a great guy.

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.

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 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.

Aw, dammit. I always liked his work and respected his opinion, even when I didn't agree with it. To me, he was always the top critic for movies. I think he'll be sorely missed.

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.

Roger Ebert, died Thursday, two days after revealing cancer returned to his body.
Siskel died in 1999 after a battle with a brain tumor.

MOVIES GIVE YOU CANCER!

Or maybe reviewing movies gives you cancer?

I dunno.

CANCER.

TWO THUMBS DOWN.

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.

Quotemander Prime said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Espy said:

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.

Click to expand...

I'm calling absolute bullshit on this. You don't have to be an artist to be a critic.

Charlie Don't Surf said:

I'm calling absolute bullshit on this. You don't have to be an artist to be a critic.

Click to expand...

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?

stienman said:

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?

Click to expand...

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're weird, Charlie. No one is arguing the general point, no one cares. You're arguing with an imaginary opponent.

stienman said:

You're arguing with an imaginary opponent.

Click to expand...

Charlie Don't Surf said:

I'm calling absolute bullshit on this. You don't have to be an artist to be a critic.

Click to expand...

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?

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

Yeah Charlie has no idea what he's talking about (lol what else is new?). If a food critic had never spent any time cooking, his opinions would be meaningless. Same goes for any type of critic.

Gilgamesh said:

Yeah Charlie has no idea what he's talking about (lol what else is new?). If a food critic had never spent any time cooking, his opinions would be meaningless. Same goes for any type of critic.

Click to expand...

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.

Ravenpoe said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

I don't know, I feel pretty secure in naming the terrible waiters I've encountered for just being bad at their job.

Yeah I just completely disagree with literally everything you've said in this thread, sorry

Charlie Don't Surf said:

Yeah I just completely disagree with literally everything you've said in this thread, sorry

Click to expand...

Thank you.

Ravenpoe said:

I don't know, I feel pretty secure in naming the terrible waiters I've encountered for just being bad at their job.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you would.

Gilgamesh is copying Charlie's tactics? This could get interesting.

Dear Halforums,

I'm not sure what happened. I was reading this compelling thread on the death of a celebrity, and suddenly my eyes rolled so hard and fast that the optic nerve disconnected.

It's freaking my kids out, too.

What should I do?

With hope,
Looking inward

stienman said:

Dear Halforums,

I'm not sure what happened. I was reading this compelling thread on the death of a celebrity, and suddenly my eyes rolled so hard and fast that the optic nerve disconnected.

It's freaking my kids out, too.

What should I do?

With hope,
Looking inward

Click to expand...

Stop reading Halforums?

Gilgamesh said:

Stop reading Halforums?

Click to expand...

Done, but not voluntarily.

Screen reading and voice recognition software works surprisingly well.[DOUBLEPOST=1365272664][/DOUBLEPOST](I am entirely joking, btw. Just in case people get the idea that I am actually suffering vision problems...)[DOUBLEPOST=1365272699][/DOUBLEPOST]Still, I'm not about to turn down hugs.[DOUBLEPOST=1365272744][/DOUBLEPOST]Unless you're sick.

stienman said:

Done, but not voluntarily.

Screen reading and voice recognition software works surprisingly well.[DOUBLEPOST=1365272664][/DOUBLEPOST](I am entirely joking, btw. Just in case people get the idea that I am actually suffering vision problems...)[DOUBLEPOST=1365272699][/DOUBLEPOST]Still, I'm not about to turn down hugs.[DOUBLEPOST=1365272744][/DOUBLEPOST]Unless you're sick.

Click to expand...

What if I'm covered in what is either chocolate or raw sewage? Can I still hug you? Will you roll the dice?

Gilgamesh said:

Yeah Charlie has no idea what he's talking about (lol what else is new?). If a food critic had never spent any time cooking, his opinions would be meaningless. Same goes for any type of critic.

Click to expand...

Thats not at all what I said or meant either. It's a ridiculous statement in fact. People can enjoy films, music, art, etc without being able to produce it themselves and they can have opinions on it that are relevant.

My only point about Ebert is that he had a wonderfully unique view because of his first hand knowledge that I for one think colored his critiques and made them better.

Anyway, lets move past this, it's really getting dumb.

I'm really sad to not read anymore of his reviews, this guy, even when I disagreed with him had some of the most insightful things to say about movies and I agree with whoever posted the TF2 review up there, it's a real gem.

Espy said:

Thats not at all what I said or meant either. It's a ridiculous statement in fact. People can enjoy films, music, art, etc without being able to produce it themselves and they can have opinions on it that are relevant.

Click to expand...

My only point about Ebert is that he had a wonderfully unique view because of his first hand knowledge that I for one think colored his critiques and made them better.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

That is a huge forehead.

Gilgamesh said:

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.

Click to expand...

That doesn't make any sense. Why should it matter if the customer understands the waiter's life story if he's terrible at his job.

Excuse me waiter, we ordered our drinks over a half an hour ago and you still haven't taken our food order.

- So, I'm only here as a favour to management.

Well, it's your job is it not? You're not doing it very well.

- YOU DON'T GET TO TELL ME I'M BAD AT MY JOB, YOU'VE NEVER DONE MY JOB!

Frank said:

That doesn't make any sense. Why should it matter if the customer understands the waiter's life story if he's terrible at his job.

Excuse me waiter, we ordered our drinks over a half an hour ago and you still haven't taken our food order.

- So, I'm only here as a favour to management.

Well, it's your job is it not? You're not doing it very well.

- YOU DON'T GET TO TELL ME I'M BAD AT MY JOB, YOU'VE NEVER DONE MY JOB!

Click to expand...

I'm kind of disappointed you messed the entire message up. Had nothing to do with her personal life. I'm saying someone who's never been a waiter won't know what difficulties might pop up during the service that they may perceive as bad service because they themselves don't have the experience.

It's still bad service.

Frank said:

It's still bad service.

Click to expand...

It is, although I think this discussion has slowly drifted to a different aspect altogether than what Espy was talking about.

As for as the waiter analogy, it may be true I don't know their struggles, but at the end of the day, I'm not sure I should care. I show up at a restaurant, I expect prompt service and courteous service. I can empathize with someone having a busy day, but it only goes so far.

My younger brother is in 4th year medical school. He says the entire process to become a doctor is pretty hellish, and if I choose to go through with it and go to med school myself, I have to fully appreciate what the words "delayed gratification" mean. It got to the point that in his 2nd year, he was eating butter sprinkled with sugar because the insane schedule he was given was destroying him mentally. Still, if he identically uses a dirty needle to give someone a shot, I doubt, "I've been on shift for 30 hours, and I'm really tired. Sorry 'bout the AIDS" is going to fly.

This:

Can you critique them? Sure. Will they be as meaningful as someone who's been through the process? Nope.

Click to expand...

can certainly be a relevant point is some, but not all cases.

Frank said:

It's still bad service.

Click to expand...

Wrong. It's interpreted that way by those without knowledge of the inner workings. Aka the ignorant.

Very much the same can be said for many critics of almost anything without experience in the field.

Gilgamesh said:

Wrong. It's interpreted that way by those without knowledge of the inner workings. Aka the ignorant.

Very much the same can be said for many critics of almost anything without experience in the field.

Click to expand...

How is it wrong? I'm the customer. My perception of service is paramount. If I perceive the service is crap, then I vote with my wallet and don't go back, and tell my friends not to go.

I can think I'm the best teacher in the world and the Chinese parents (who are not teachers) are dumbasses, but if they don't like my teaching or don't think my performance is up to par to be worth the money they're spending for their child to learn, then I lose my job.

Your point, gilgamesh, I think is highly dependent on the situation. If you're a waiter and I think your service is shitty, I give you a small tip. If its bad enough, I tell your manager. If I'm a geneticist and I'm publishing a groundbreaking paper on platypus DNA, then no, I don't really care what Joe the Plumber thinks and judgement by others in my field is what matters.

Terrik said:

How is it wrong? I'm the customer. My perception of service is paramount. If I perceive the service is crap, then I vote with my wallet and don't go back, and tell my friends not to go.

Click to expand...

I never said you didn't have a right to an opinion. I simply stated you'd be wrong on why the service was bad.

I can think I'm the best teacher in the world and the Chinese parents (who are not teachers) are dumbasses, but if they don't like my teaching or don't think my performance is up to par to be worth the money they're spending for their child to learn, then I lose my job.

Click to expand...

This isn't about losing or keeping jobs, this is about people who think they know a situation/art form better than the server/artist. They can have an opinion, but that's all it'll be, an opinion based on their own ignorant view. A critic who has experience in the situation will hold a higher opinion more worth being treated with a response from the artist/performer. THAT is the point you're missing.[/quote]

Gilgamesh said:

Wrong. It's interpreted that way by those without knowledge of the inner workings. Aka the ignorant.

Very much the same can be said for many critics of almost anything without experience in the field.

Click to expand...

Complete bullshit. Absolute, complete and utter bullshit.

You can make all the excuses you want, bad service is bad service.

Gilgamesh said:

And I feel the exact opposite. It's like telling a waiter he's terrible at his job when you've never done it.

Click to expand...

You don't need to have done a job to know someone's terrible at it if you have someone who's good at it to compare them to. If one waiter brings you your food and drinks like they're supposed to, while another brings you fresh horse manure on a platter, then you can tell which is a good waiter and which isn't even if you've never done it yourself (unless you ordered horse manure).

If you ever saw Roger Ebert's movie... you would realize that he had no idea how to make a good movie.

This has turned into a very stupid argument, and yet I can't stay away.

Service at a restaurant is catered towards the customers, many of which are not going to have experience in the restaurant field. Service is meant to appeal to them to keep them as customers, without the need for them to have a background in restauranteering.

In the same way, (most) movies are created with an audience in mind, and that audience isn't other movie creators. This is why a movie critic doesn't have to be experienced in -making- movies (though there is no argument that this experience can add perspective) because they are entering into the experience as the audience, and their job is to translate their opinion to other laypersons in that same audience pool.


If you, as a film director, create a movie that only other movie creators are going to enjoy, you shouldn't be upset when critics reporting to the general public give it a pass.

I give this conversation two thumbs down.

No actually, I came in to say that I see both sides of the argument (so something equally useless, I suppose).

The funny thing is that this has gotten way out of hand because I never meant it to be a conversation about the director and the audience (the server and the customer).

I simply meant to say that the opinion of a critic who understands the process by having experienced it has a more thorough and well versed opinion than one who doesn't. Therefore, their opinion is more valued.

That's all.

Gilgamesh said:

The funny thing is that this has gotten way out of hand because I never meant it to be a conversation about the director and the audience (the server and the customer).

I simply meant to say that the opinion of a critic who understands the process by having experienced it has a more thorough and well versed opinion than one who doesn't. Therefore, their opinion is more valued.

That's all.

Click to expand...

That's not at all what you said.

Gilgamesh said:

If a food critic had never spent any time cooking, his opinions would be meaningless. Same goes for any type of critic.

Click to expand...

Ravenpoe said:

That's not at all what you said.

Click to expand...

You're right, however I did say it was a bad analogy. So I refreshed my point in that post.

So, back to the topic of this thread:

Nostalgia Critic talks about the passing of Roger Ebert:

Gilgamesh said:

I simply stated you'd be wrong on why the service was bad.

Click to expand...

That's the issue, right there. Nobody else is talking about why the service is bad. Customers don't give a fuck why it's bad. They care that it is bad, and that's it. Maybe there are valid reasons, maybe they'd be clear if the customer had worked the job. It just doesn't matter to them at all.

When I worked as a waiter, I was terrible at it, so now I have a special perspective and appreciation for bad service.

On a more serious note though, rest in peace Mr. Ebert. I didn't always agree with your opinions, but I respected that your opinions were always well thought-out and reasoned. Have fun in that giant cinema in the sky.

(Though that thing you did with the video games not being art, that made me rage a bit)

Vrii said:

That's the issue, right there. Nobody else is talking about why the service is bad. Customers don't give a fuck why it's bad. They care that it is bad, and that's it. Maybe there are valid reasons, maybe they'd be clear if the customer had worked the job. It just doesn't matter to them at all.

Click to expand...

Yeah we're already past that bad analogy I used.