- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: "Hated hated hated hated hated this movie." Ebert's review turns 20
Posted on 7/22/14 at 2:25 pm to Baloo
Posted on 7/22/14 at 2:25 pm to Baloo
Of course he's a little shite, but he was moving on and was asked why. He never said anything about ebert.
So ebert takes it upon himself to trash him in a column. That's pushing papers.
And what he was really pissed about was him ditching print media for online (a mistake on JM's part for sure because who has heard from him) but it 100% didn't concern ebert
He just liked to trash people in addition to movies. Again, I just don't like critics and ebert always went beyond professional criticism into personal criticism. He was famous and successful sure, but lacked any quality, substance or consistency. I feel certain he took playoffs to give positive reviews.
So ebert takes it upon himself to trash him in a column. That's pushing papers.
And what he was really pissed about was him ditching print media for online (a mistake on JM's part for sure because who has heard from him) but it 100% didn't concern ebert
He just liked to trash people in addition to movies. Again, I just don't like critics and ebert always went beyond professional criticism into personal criticism. He was famous and successful sure, but lacked any quality, substance or consistency. I feel certain he took playoffs to give positive reviews.
0
Posted on 7/22/14 at 2:27 pm to biglego
Most people don't, so why is ebert (a television personality in addition to a columnist) bothering to call him out?
Posted on 7/22/14 at 2:49 pm to DelU249
quote:
Most people don't, so why is ebert (a television personality in addition to a columnist) bothering to call him out?
Because Mariotti left the Chicago Sun-Times and then made very public comments about what a crappy paper and organization it was. So Ebert wrote a public letter defending his employer and the people who work there. Ebert had the largest megaphone to defend his coworkers from attack, and he used it.
Jay Mariotti is a gigantic assface. He didn't need to take shots at the paper after he left. Ebert bothered to call him out to defend the value of what his coworkers do for a living. Which makes him a giant worm in your eyes, I'm sure.
Hey, leave for another job. But don't take public shots at them on your way out. That makes you the a-hole.
Posted on 7/22/14 at 3:00 pm to Baloo
JM was asked and that was his opinion. No one asked ebert, he was just always eager to bash anything. The CST didn't need a defense and a lot of what JM said was true...print media is dead
Ebert came across as someone bitter for thinking there was something better than the CST and in utter denial that it was a dying medium
And if he had problems with the paper , then so what? Ebert didn't actually refute anything JM said, just bashed him. He was a typical critic
Ebert came across as someone bitter for thinking there was something better than the CST and in utter denial that it was a dying medium
And if he had problems with the paper , then so what? Ebert didn't actually refute anything JM said, just bashed him. He was a typical critic
Posted on 7/22/14 at 3:00 pm to Baloo
I also loathe JM even though I haven't seen him on TV in 10 years
Posted on 7/22/14 at 3:15 pm to DelU249
So who's actually seen this movie?
Posted on 7/22/14 at 4:27 pm to GeauxTGRZ
Roger Ebert is and always has been a little bitch. His tastes are shite and he's one of the most pretentious douchebags in the film industry.
Posted on 7/22/14 at 4:28 pm to ManBearTiger
Was.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 5:48 am to ManBearTiger
it seems like you've never read a review of his
Posted on 7/23/14 at 8:27 am to BobRoss
I think that was a revised review. I think that his initial review of Groundhog Day was poor.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 9:31 am to LSUlefty
It's been a long time, but that's the one with Bruce Willis in a pink bunny suit right?
Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:31 am to LSUlefty
quote:
So who's actually seen this movie?
Posted on 7/23/14 at 10:50 am to biglego
I kinda wanna to see North now.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 1:33 pm to JJ27
quote:
It's been a long time, but that's the one with Bruce Willis in a pink bunny suit right?
Yes, that's it.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 1:40 pm to GeauxTGRZ
Now I know at least two MB posters' movie opinions to never put any stock into.
Back to the OP, one of Ebert's best and most unsung reviews among countless classics was for The Howling. He respected that movie so little, he didn't even dignify it with a proper review. Pretty much just wrote a clown piece.
Ebert's Howling Review
Back to the OP, one of Ebert's best and most unsung reviews among countless classics was for The Howling. He respected that movie so little, he didn't even dignify it with a proper review. Pretty much just wrote a clown piece.
Ebert's Howling Review
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 7/23/14 at 1:45 pm to shutterspeed
Ebert showed his true colors in his later years as he matured with his blog.
He knew he had to play a defined role for the TV show...but from all accounts, Siskel was more of an arse (from the documentary)...
Ebert's legacy is his blog...which was great his last 10 years...open to the fans and generous.
I don't know how anyone can hate Ebert...he really opened up...championed everyone being a critic, a movie-lover, a great writer as he matured...and fan and was the farthest thing from pretentious as somebody mentioned.
His reviews were accessible on a normal movie-goer level...unlike Kael.
In the thousands of movies he review, he's going to have a few misses...like Blade Runner.
But he seemed and appeared always honest to correct his younger self and maybe ego - in his later years.
Ebert opened up film to the masses...and there are many stories of him helping aspiring directors.
To call him an arse (as someone did on here)...is beyond pathetic.
He knew he had to play a defined role for the TV show...but from all accounts, Siskel was more of an arse (from the documentary)...
Ebert's legacy is his blog...which was great his last 10 years...open to the fans and generous.
I don't know how anyone can hate Ebert...he really opened up...championed everyone being a critic, a movie-lover, a great writer as he matured...and fan and was the farthest thing from pretentious as somebody mentioned.
His reviews were accessible on a normal movie-goer level...unlike Kael.
In the thousands of movies he review, he's going to have a few misses...like Blade Runner.
But he seemed and appeared always honest to correct his younger self and maybe ego - in his later years.
Ebert opened up film to the masses...and there are many stories of him helping aspiring directors.
To call him an arse (as someone did on here)...is beyond pathetic.
This post was edited on 7/23/14 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 7/23/14 at 2:51 pm to Zamoro10
ebert most likely took payoffs to give shitty movies good review. I don't know how else to explain his lack of consistency.
also, if he morally objected to a movie, he would give it a bad review. Kick arse isn't a work of art or even a great/memorable movie, but it was a thumb up/over the threshold movie, and he slammed it because he didn't like kids committing violence...what a terrible critic. And again, him making the movie review about him and not about the film. Not that there are any movie critics I enjoy, but for instance there are several game critics who objectively review games, and yet movie critics always make it a statement of taste or personal choice.
Ebert is overrated. I'm not saying I dislike the guy (personally he came off to me as a fat little weasel)but he certainly didn't advance anything or do anything better than his contemporaries
also, if he morally objected to a movie, he would give it a bad review. Kick arse isn't a work of art or even a great/memorable movie, but it was a thumb up/over the threshold movie, and he slammed it because he didn't like kids committing violence...what a terrible critic. And again, him making the movie review about him and not about the film. Not that there are any movie critics I enjoy, but for instance there are several game critics who objectively review games, and yet movie critics always make it a statement of taste or personal choice.
Ebert is overrated. I'm not saying I dislike the guy (personally he came off to me as a fat little weasel)but he certainly didn't advance anything or do anything better than his contemporaries
Posted on 7/23/14 at 2:54 pm to DelU249
North was one of my favorite movies as a kid, I wore that VHS tape out. I don't understand the hate for it.
Is it a cinematic masterpiece? Of course not, but it's a kid movie that was pretty good, and had a good message. It was also fairly unique, or at least I can't recall seeing many other similar stories. Also had a pretty big time cast IIRC.
I'll stick up for North. Although if I watched it now it would probably not be great, as a kid it was legit.
Is it a cinematic masterpiece? Of course not, but it's a kid movie that was pretty good, and had a good message. It was also fairly unique, or at least I can't recall seeing many other similar stories. Also had a pretty big time cast IIRC.
I'll stick up for North. Although if I watched it now it would probably not be great, as a kid it was legit.
Posted on 7/23/14 at 3:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i honestly think jay lost his mind a couple years ago. his twitter is sometimes scary to read b/c it's so cryptic and referencing shite going on his his head that we cannot ever know
Didn't know he was a comedian, I just knew him as a terrible guest on Around the Horn.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News