Author Topic: Roger Ebert  (Read 64423 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

grand theft sparrow

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2038
  • NO SLEEP TIL BROKER!
  • Respect: +7
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #60 on: June 16, 2004, 01:45:07 PM »
0
Quote from: themodernage02
why cant the first two be better?


You answered your own question.

Quote from: themodernage02
it has a better director, and has some better camerawork, acting and more adult themes but its still a bit of a mess of storytelling.


The first two films weren't exactly tight either story-wise.  It's been discussed on the Azkaban thread that Steve Kloves is leaving a lot of stuff by the wayside.  I think it's more out of necessity than incompetence (every HP film would be at least 4 hours long if they included everything Rowling wrote).  But since the scripts seem to be on the same level of quality, all that's left to judge them on is the directing, the acting, cinematography, VFX, etc.   In those respects, Azkaban is clearly the best film in the series so far.  

What Cuaron did with Azkaban was he took the wizard world and made it realistic, as if it actually exists with our world.  Instead of doing the Chris Columbus eye candy thing, "Hey! Look at this!", Cuaron lets the viewers discover these things in the frame themselves.  That kind of filmmaking is what the film series needed all along.  I still like the first two films but the third one is just so far above and beyond what the first two accomplished that I can't imagine someone who knows as much about film as Ebert not seeing it as a step up.

LostEraser

  • The Road of Trials
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Respect: 0
    • http://www.karlborges.com
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #61 on: June 16, 2004, 09:26:35 PM »
0
Quote from: hacksparrow
Roger Ebert lost what little credibility he had left when he wrote these words:

"Is 'Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban' as good as the first two films? Not quite."


Amen! ....Don't worry, I got your back. lol! :wink:
Capra tells us that, in effect, love's dreams are only dreams and that they will never quite bear translation into practical forms of relationship and expression. They will never be realized in the world but only in our consciousness and in our most daring and glorious works of art - but that, for Capra, is no reason to abandon love's dreams.
--Ray Carney, American Vision: The Films Of Frank Capra

Chest Rockwell

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1596
  • Respect: 0
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #62 on: June 18, 2004, 08:34:58 AM »
0
The problem with Ebert is that he judges some films on entirely personal bases. Take for instance, from his 'Girl Next Door' review: "That a porn king saves the day gives you an idea of the movie's limited moral horizons." And he also gave The Passion four stars for what seemed like Christian reasons. Mind you, this all isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I personally would rather havea critic review a movie based on its cinematic value and leave the moral value to the viewer.

Pubrick

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 12170
  • on the not-face of it
  • Respect: +781
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #63 on: June 18, 2004, 09:06:06 AM »
0
Quote from: Chest Rockwell
I personally would rather havea critic review a movie based on its cinematic value and leave the moral value to the viewer.

chest: yeah well that's never gonna happen. all critics hav their personal opinions and biases, that's what their careers are based on, unless u only read reviews from robots ur always gonna get sumone's personal views affecting how they perceive a film.

everyone: all that matters from a critic i think, is that they know what they're talking about.. that doesn't mean in every area of every issue they encounter in the movies they watch. ebert seems to know quite a bit about christianity so his response to the passion was prolly more educated than most.

that's another thing, how can sumone EVER review sumthing purely on cinematic criteria, when the movies themselves are almost never made that way? it's a total lie that film students and pretentious robot-reviewers hav invented that movies are just about the angles or lenses or sets or even performances. a critic will hav a philosophy about what movies actually are, i imagine based not only how many films they've watched but equally on an acute perception of HOW movies hav affected themselves and others.

in the end that's all one can hope for from a critic, their honest impression on what they just saw in relation to other movies, themselves, and everybody else.

nobody: i find it unbelievable that anyone would criticize a critic if their reviews barely consist of more than "the directing was good". i wonder if anyone has ever actually thought about all the movies they've seen. i know some hav. it is evident that some hav wrestled with the same ideas, as ur insights into films, albeit different to mine, offer more depth than the artifice of their creation.
under the paving stones.

FeloniousFunk

  • The Road of Trials
  • **
  • Posts: 74
  • Respect: 0
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #64 on: July 05, 2004, 05:22:39 PM »
0
BEST OF 2004 SO FAR

EBERT & ROEPER:
SPIDER-MAN 2
FAHRENHEIT 9/11
THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST
BAADASSSSS!


WORST OF 2004 SO FAR

EBERT & ROEPER:
WHOLE TEN YARDS
SCOOBY DOO 2
CONNIE AND CARLA


ABSOLUTE BEST SO FAR

EBERT & ROEPER:
KILL BILL: VOLUME 2

ABSOLUTE WORST SO FAR

ROGER EBERT:
NEW YORK MINUTE

RICHARD ROEPER:
WHITE CHICKS

eward

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3021
  • Respect: +120
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #65 on: July 05, 2004, 07:24:59 PM »
0
wowwy
"Do you laugh at jealousy?"

"No, I don't even laugh at seasickness! I happen to regard jealousy as the seasickness of passion."

LostEraser

  • The Road of Trials
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Respect: 0
    • http://www.karlborges.com
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #66 on: July 12, 2004, 01:28:24 AM »
0
I stumbled upon his list of the top ten films of all time that he gave to sight and sound back in 2002 when they did that big top ten poll. Here it is if anyone is interested (he listed them in alphabetical order):
    
Aguirre, Wrath of God (Herzog)
Apocalypse Now (Coppola)
Citizen Kane (Welles)
Dekalog (Kieslowski)
La dolce vita (Fellini)
The General (Keaton)
Raging Bull (Scorsese)
2001: A Space Odyssey (Kubrick)
Tokyo Story (Ozu)
Vertigo (Hitchcock)
Capra tells us that, in effect, love's dreams are only dreams and that they will never quite bear translation into practical forms of relationship and expression. They will never be realized in the world but only in our consciousness and in our most daring and glorious works of art - but that, for Capra, is no reason to abandon love's dreams.
--Ray Carney, American Vision: The Films Of Frank Capra

matt35mm

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3246
  • Bony old behind.
  • Respect: +494
    • My Films on Vimeo
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #67 on: July 12, 2004, 03:05:13 AM »
0
Yeah I just finished listening to his commentary for the Citizen Kane DVD.  After clarifying that lists are silly and stupid, he says that it's a part of his job and that he officially lists Citizen Kane as his #1.

Myxo

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1768
  • Respect: +29
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #68 on: July 12, 2004, 05:22:48 PM »
0
I saw Ebert's review of Resevoir Dogs on my DVD and basically wrote him off.

Siskel was much better.

.. and skinnier ..

Ravi

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4876
  • Respect: +92
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #69 on: July 14, 2004, 02:12:11 PM »
0
Quote from: Myxomatosis
I saw Ebert's review of Resevoir Dogs on my DVD and basically wrote him off.

Siskel was much better.

.. and skinnier ..


Siskel didn't like it either.

abuck1220

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 282
  • Respect: +7
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #70 on: August 26, 2004, 03:53:21 PM »
0
ebert sung the 7th inning stretch at the cubs' game today. he said that if he was stranded on a desert island and could only have one movie, he'd go w/ citizen kane or godfather. he also mentioned the third man, notorious and singing in the rain as some of his other favorites.

diggler

  • The Return Threshold
  • ****
  • Posts: 914
  • Respect: +68
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #71 on: September 02, 2004, 03:55:04 PM »
0
man, maybe i'm the product of the short attention span generation, but i just can't watch citizen kane anymore. yea, the cinematography is incredible, yes it is a masterpiece.  but it's just so god damn boring. once was enough for me.

criticize me if you want, i wish i'd like it more.  my parents bought me the dvd for christmas and i still haven't watched it at all. just haven't been in the mood.
I'm not racist, I'm just slutty

grand theft sparrow

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2038
  • NO SLEEP TIL BROKER!
  • Respect: +7
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #72 on: September 02, 2004, 04:04:00 PM »
0
Quote from: ddiggler6280
man, maybe i'm the product of the short attention span generation, but i just can't watch citizen kane anymore. yea, the cinematography is incredible, yes it is a masterpiece.  but it's just so god damn boring. once was enough for me.



*says nothing, just shakes his head, looks down and weeps*

bonanzataz

  • Electrician
  • *****
  • Posts: 2887
  • Respect: +14
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #73 on: September 02, 2004, 04:06:27 PM »
0
Quote from: ddiggler6280
man, maybe i'm the product of the short attention span generation, but i just can't watch citizen kane anymore. yea, the cinematography is incredible, yes it is a masterpiece.  but it's just so god damn boring. once was enough for me.

criticize me if you want, i wish i'd like it more.  my parents bought me the dvd for christmas and i still haven't watched it at all. just haven't been in the mood.


just watch it a few more times and you'll see.
The corpses all hang headless and limp bodies with no surprises and the blood drains down like devil’s rain we’ll bathe tonight I want your skulls I need your skulls I want your skulls I need your skulls Demon I am and face I peel to see your skin turned inside out, ’cause gotta have you on my wall gotta have you on my wall, ’cause I want your skulls I need your skulls I want your skulls I need your skulls collect the heads of little girls and put ’em on my wall hack the heads off little girls and put ’em on my wall I want your skulls I need your skulls I want your skulls I need your skulls

Weird. Oh

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 334
  • Respect: 0
Re: Roger Ebert - INVALIDATED ..again
« Reply #74 on: September 04, 2004, 03:20:32 AM »
0
Quote from: ddiggler6280
man, maybe i'm the product of the short attention span generation, but i just can't watch citizen kane anymore. yea, the cinematography is incredible, yes it is a masterpiece.  but it's just so god damn boring. once was enough for me.

criticize me if you want, i wish i'd like it more.  my parents bought me the dvd for christmas and i still haven't watched it at all. just haven't been in the mood.


You can send it to me if you'd like.  :lol:
The more arguments you win, the fewer friends you will have.

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy