Roger Ebert's Top Ten

Started by Gold Trumpet, December 25, 2003, 01:19:27 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions

pete

#30
December 28, 2003, 12:35:07 PM
yeah, especially the most well-market-researched comment, I don't really see that many attempts to appeal to the minorities, or single guys age 17-44, or people who drive cars in general, or believers of any religion.
I think the most well market-researched film(s) goes to the matrix series.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

Myxo

#31
December 28, 2003, 05:56:30 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
1.) Monster
2.) Lost in Translation
3.) American Splendor
4.) Finding Nemo
5.) Master and Commander
6.) Mystic River
7.) Owning Mahoney
8.) The Son
9.) Whale Rider
10.) In America

Return of the King deserves to be on this list.

.. and my god what is Master and Commander doing on it?

Lost in Translation was a beautiful, beautiful film. Hell, Paul Thomas Anderson put it on his list of favorites for the year. Thats good enough for me.

Derek237

#32
December 31, 2003, 01:27:08 PM
Ebert's a dirty old man. I'm looking forward to Roeper's list. He always has the better movies. He may be annoying at times, but he does have great taste in movies. And usually the best movies on Ebert's list are on his list too, anyway.

Pas

#33
December 31, 2003, 03:15:46 PM
Quote from: Derek237Ebert's a dirty old man.

Indeed ... no wonder David Lynch makes it an almost absolute rule that if Ebert is saying 'thumbs up' he won't like it. It's exagerated but still. His review of Blue Velvet is one of the funniest thing I've heard. You could swear it was a 60 year old church lady speaking. "And in "Blue Velvet," there are some scenes in which a woman is degraded and humiliated and made to suffer obscenely, and other scenes in which we're supposed to giggle." Haha

cine

#34
December 31, 2003, 03:34:12 PM
Quote from: Derek237I'm looking forward to Roeper's list. He always has the better movies. He may be annoying at times, but he does have great taste in movies. And usually the best movies on Ebert's list are on his list too, anyway.
Right, because Memento and Vanilla Sky were the best films of 2001.  :roll:

SoNowThen

#35
December 31, 2003, 03:43:00 PM
they were actually, along with The Man Who Wasn't There, Royal Tenenbaums, and In Praise Of Love
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

cine

#36
December 31, 2003, 03:45:35 PM
I apologize for rewinding two years like this  :?

The Royal Tenenbaums was one of the best, while the other three were just good movies. I haven't seen In Praise of Love. :(

SoNowThen

#37
December 31, 2003, 03:48:57 PM
2001 & 2002 had their good points, but all things considered, I think it was the best year for movies since '99. Though not as good as '99.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

cine

#38
December 31, 2003, 03:51:12 PM
I don't know if I can decide whether 1999 or 2003 is better.

Derek237

#39
December 31, 2003, 03:52:02 PM
I think Vanilla Sky was the best of 2001. Just my opinion though. That's why I like Roeper, his tastes are similar to mine....

SoNowThen

#40
December 31, 2003, 03:55:21 PM
Yeah, I used to want to slit Roeper's throat, until he picked Gangs as the best movie last year, and I thought "hey, this guy's alright!!". He can surprise you every now and again with some top picks.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

cine

#41
December 31, 2003, 03:56:33 PM
Fair enough. I agree with Roeper from time to time but it's not his taste of film that I'm bothered by, but his perception of film. So many times over, he'll make remarks about a film that he just didn't get, to which Ebert will generally reply, "but that was the point" and then he'll say, "yeah, well I just didn't like it." Or something along those lines. And it would really bug me because I, too, am shouting at the screen at how foolishly he takes some great movies. Maybe I just need to mute the TV when he starts talking.
Edit: Oh, and yes, I really liked that he chose Gangs of NY as the best film of 2002, even though I didn't agree with him.

kassius

#42
December 31, 2003, 10:01:47 PM
I'm shocked too.  I haven't seen "Kill Bill" but on Roger's site for the "Chicago Tribune", he gave it four stars.  Not to shabby... in fact that he best of the best.

I just can't believe that I haven't seen "American Splendor". Geez.

Quote from: SydneyI'm shocked that Kill Bill wasn't on his list. That's certainly one of the top three movies this year. I strongly disagree with him on Master and Commander and Owning Mahoney.

What a coincidence that for the past three years, every best movie of the year has started with M. Particularly Monster and Monster's Ball.

NEON MERCURY

#43
January 01, 2004, 03:31:54 PM
..actually peter travers of rollingstone's top 10 list is near perfect.......even if i haven't seen all of them..i still feel it is near perfect ..if i was smart enough i would link it for everyone ..but i'm sorta computer/message board illiterate.......

cine

#44
January 01, 2004, 03:41:37 PM
Quote from: NEON MERCURY..actually peter travers of rollingstone's top 10 list is near perfect....... ..if i was smart enough i would link it for everyone ..but i'm sorta computer/message board illiterate.......
http://www.rollingstone.com/features/featuregen.asp?pid=2476
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions