Ok, so Ebert gives the new Tomb Raider movie 3 stars, but gives A Woman Is A Woman (a new restored 35mm print of Godard's second film is touring around the art houses) 2 stars. Gee, forget the fact that A Woman Is A Woman is hilarious and beautifully shot. Forget that it was directed by a master director, perhaps the most important filmmaker of the modern era. It gets a thumbs down! Go see Angelina's boobs instead!
Iron Chef
07-25-03, 12:51 PM
( o Y o )
Mopower
07-25-03, 12:53 PM
They both sound like borefests.
Trigger
07-25-03, 12:59 PM
Maybe Tomb Raider is decent and the other one is pompous and boring... have you seen either film?
William Fuld
07-25-03, 01:04 PM
And he's fat! Did I mention he's fat? And crazy! Fat and crazy!
Zzzzz....
freudguy
07-25-03, 02:48 PM
Tomb Raider - 3 stars?
Further proof that Roger Ebert is slowly losing his mind.
Face/Off
07-25-03, 02:49 PM
Does anyone like you?
Dr. DVD
07-25-03, 02:55 PM
Interesting how every week on DVDtalk you can count on two things:
1) A thread about the weeks new blockbusters.
and
2) One devoted to illustrating that Roger Ebert has lost it for the umpteenth time.
wendersfan
07-25-03, 03:02 PM
Originally posted by Trigger
Maybe Tomb Raider is decent and the other one is pompous and boring... have you seen either film?
The last thing to describe A Woman Is a Woman would be pompous and boring.
marty888
07-25-03, 03:39 PM
Originally posted by freudguy
Further proof that Roger Ebert is slowly losing his mind.
Deja vu all over again .....
audrey
07-25-03, 04:07 PM
2 stars is a thumbs down? That’s an average rating. Ebert has praised much of Godard’s body of work—the fact that he feels A Woman Is A Woman doesn’t deliver does not imply he’s lost it---it simply means he doesn’t feel this flick is exceptional in any way—a point he elaborates on in the body of his review.
As to Laura Croft, I haven’t seen it—but it does look like fun (even though I hated the first installment) and that’s pretty much what he says about it.
Corvin
07-25-03, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by Dr. DVD
2) One devoted to illustrating that Roger Ebert has lost it for the umpteenth time.
Amen. Enough is enough.
FuzzyBallz
07-25-03, 04:34 PM
If you don't like the guy's reviews, don't read it. What's wrong w/ people having to dislike something, but continue to rant about it week after week? Maybe the problem's not Ebert, but you.
funkyryno
07-25-03, 04:48 PM
I doubt any of the Ebert-haters have anywhere near the movie knowledge that Ebert has. Plus, I doubt that any of them can write as well as he can.
freudguy
07-25-03, 05:11 PM
If you don't like the guy's reviews, don't read it. What's wrong w/ people having to dislike something, but continue to rant about it week after week? Maybe the problem's not Ebert, but you.
Originally posted by funkyryno
I doubt any of the Ebert-haters have anywhere near the movie knowledge that Ebert has. Plus, I doub that any of them can write as well as he can.
Yeah, I'm an elitist snob.
Trigger
07-25-03, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by freudguy
Yeah, I'm an elitist snob. At least you can admit that.
troystiffler
07-25-03, 06:17 PM
I give a *guff* to this thread.
<b>*guff*</b>
Do you guys actually <i>READ</i> his reviews?
I guess I wasn't very clear. I'm pro-Ebert.
Dr. DVD
07-25-03, 07:22 PM
Why don't we just petition for a new sub-forum entitled "Roger Ebert has Lost It" to go in the movie section? Lord knows it would get updated every week or so.
B.A.
07-25-03, 07:34 PM
Originally posted by Dr. DVD
Why don't we just petition for a new sub-forum entitled "Roger Ebert has Lost It" to go in the movie section? Lord knows it would get updated every week or so.
why not just ask for a "Critic-bashing" Forum? ;)
TCG
07-25-03, 07:54 PM
Originally posted by bahist17
why not just ask for a "Critic-bashing" Forum? ;)
I second that.
RyoHazuki
07-25-03, 08:14 PM
Why do so many people say Ebert has lost it. Just look at the guy sitting next to him. I was flipping through one of Roepers books and that guy is so bad its unbearable.
William Fuld
07-25-03, 08:26 PM
Richard Roeper is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
cultshock
07-25-03, 08:45 PM
Originally posted by William Fuld
Richard Roeper is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
And of course, all the above are the most important criteria to be a film critic. :D
joeydaninja
07-25-03, 09:49 PM
I was wondering about that when I saw his high rating for Tomb Raider 2. I think subconsciously, Ebert is influenced by big ones. :D But Joe Morgenstern of the Wall Street Journal also gave Tomb Raider 2, a good review, and I find him also to be quite reliable. Let's see how the other critics judge it.
jaeufraser
07-25-03, 10:00 PM
You can't compare one review to the next. His expectations for a movie like Tomb Raider are different than that of Godard's movie. he expects a fun little action romp with fun visuals from tomb raider, and with that, I suppose he got it so he gave it a thumbs up. Hell, he liked the first Tomb Raider and gave it three stars. Nonetheless, considering that no one here has actually seen the movie, not to mention Roger Ebert is a movie critic, not a person who gives tells us what our opinion will be on the movie, these threads are pointless. What if I watch Tomb Raider and I like it? Does that mean I've lost my mind also? OMG!!! I even enjoyed Congo, the first Tomb Raider, Last Action Hero, I must be INSANE!!!
tsohg
07-25-03, 10:12 PM
Originally posted by Iron Chef
( o Y o )
:drool:MMM ASCII Jigglies
*right click saves*
Face/Off
07-25-03, 11:24 PM
I guess we have a genre snob here.
Sierra Disc
07-25-03, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by jaeufraser
You can't compare one review to the next. His expectations for a movie like Tomb Raider are different than that of Godard's movie.
And you know, we can repeat this until we're blue in the face, but 90% of the people out there will still misinterpret the "stars" in his reviews. It's all relative, but nobody cares. He gave "Tomb Raider" *** ? How dare he!
Revoltor
07-26-03, 01:13 AM
IYO
tha_dvd_man
07-26-03, 04:00 AM
Tomb Raider 2 was a boring, unexciting over-the-top Hollywood crapfest action movie. It sucked, just like the first one did. Just because a movie is an escapist 'popcorn-flick' doesn't mean I go into the theater with lower standards than I do when going to see movies of other genres. Apparantly Hollywood thinks I should. Lord knows Ebert does, and I lose respect for him every time a review of his reflects that.
I pretty much ignore Ebert's reviews of popcorn-flicks as of late.
FuzzyBallz
07-26-03, 04:39 AM
Originally posted by tsohg
:drool:MMM ASCII Jigglies
*right click saves*
Muhahahaha. Man, you're so damn funny.
Due do popular demand, I think the admins should create a Ranting and Dissing Movies/Critics Forum.
matrixrok9
07-26-03, 05:06 AM
Well he did give Original Sin a thumbs up. Anything with Jolie being in a major role in a movie = thumbs up. So Michael Bay, hire Jolie as the main female character and you will get a good review from Ebert.
eXcentris
07-26-03, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by tha_dvd_man
Just because a movie is an escapist 'popcorn-flick' doesn't mean I go into the theater with lower standards than I do when going to see movies of other genres. Apparantly Hollywood thinks I should.
:thumbsup:
Face/Off
07-26-03, 12:34 PM
Originally posted by matrixrok9
Well he did give Original Sin a thumbs up. Anything with Jolie being in a major role in a movie = thumbs up.
Like the thumbs down for Girl Inturrupted, Gone in 60 Seconds, Playing By Heart, Life or Something Like It, and The Bone Collector?
jekbrown
07-26-03, 12:37 PM
well, its all relative... maybe tomb raider is a 3-star summer flick and what-ever-its-called is only a 2-star film considering whatever genre its supposed to be.
AFA "the most important filmmaker of the modern era", thats completely irrelevant... even great film makers can make a turd and a movie should receive no more or less praise based on who directed the film. It may be worth discussing elsewhere, but in a review of a film, it has no real importance.
j
RolloTomasi
07-26-03, 12:51 PM
It's not like Ebert hates Godard - you noticed that he just wrote about Breathless in The Great Movies, right? And A Woman is a Woman is nowhere near as good as Breathless, so on Ebert's method of review, two stars sounds about right. He's holding Godard to a higher standard because that is expected.
Tomb Raider, on the other hand, is not held to such a standard. It's pretty obvious that it is a mindless popcorn action flick, so Ebert assumes (correctly, in my case, and I am guessing many others') that the question is whether it is a good mindless popcorn action flick. If it is, then three stars sounds about right. Of course, Angelina Jolie might just have given the movie a bonus star - considering how reviled Godard's last film was, maybe he should recruit her if he really wants to get a favorable review from Ebert :)
And anyway, it's been said many times before that the star rating is not really important, it's the review. I wish that Ebert would just switch to a thumbs up / thumbs down rating or just drop the score entirely, so there wouldn't be all this petty quibbling about stars.
Buford T Pusser
08-02-03, 01:28 AM
You should be nice to Ebert. He helped Russ Meyer bring us "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls".
SunMonkey
08-02-03, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by audrey
2 stars is a thumbs down? That’s an average rating.
I think when you compare his Sun-Times reviews to his TV reviews, his :up: corresponds to his *** or higher write-ups.
Pants
08-02-03, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by jekbrown
AFA "the most important filmmaker of the modern era", thats completely irrelevant... even great film makers can make a turd and a movie should receive no more or less praise based on who directed the film. It may be worth discussing elsewhere, but in a review of a film, it has no real importance.
j As for Tomb Raider 2 I don't care what ebert gave it, or anyone else, but...
...If you were familiar with film and had seen the work of Godard (or at least could remember his name) I might listen to this arguement, but considering you have no frame of reference I really think this statement is rediculous. See the movie...then comment.
Rypro 525
08-02-03, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by Buford T Pusser
You should be nice to Ebert. He helped Russ Meyer bring us "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls". thanks for the sig
Terrell
08-02-03, 05:20 PM
I don't know if Ebert has lost it, but to the people defending him, get real. We all know why he gave Tomb Raider 2 a positive review. He knows it, and after watching Ebert & Roeper, Roeper knows it as well. He even called Roger on it.
Everyone knows the reason why Ebert gave TR2 a good review. He gave it a good review because he's ga-ga over Angelina Jolie. He even used the lame excuse that you can't apply logic to a film like this. BS! I notice he doesn't extend that same idiotic courtesy to other summer popcorn fare he rips into. The fact is the film is awful and laughable. It has plot holes big enough to drive a dump truck through.
So please, let's stop with the Ebert is infallable crap. He can be criticized just like anyone else. On this issue, he deserves to be criticized, if only for his stupid logic and his complete aversion to the obvious flaws all throughout this film. People say movies and directors shouldn't be beyond criticism, then neither should critics.
Ebert's knowledge of film is well known. But the guy has absolutely no practical experience with making films. He's written or co-written 3 films, two of which were absolutely god awful. Beneath the Valley of the Ultra Vixens and Beneath the Valley of the Dolls. The third one is called Up! I haven't seen it so I can't comment on it. But I imagine it's bad as well. So if Roger Ebert is going to sit his fat butt in a chair and criticize the work someone has poured their heart and soul into, sometimes deservedly so, then I'll criticize him when I think he deserves it.
Like the thumbs down for Girl Inturrupted, Gone in 60 Seconds, Playing By Heart, Life or Something Like It, and The Bone Collector?
That's because in those films Jolie wasn't all fancied up with makeup and showing off her body.
ProjectMayhem
08-02-03, 05:58 PM
I like Ebert. He judges by what he likes and what is fun. I've agreed with him on many occassions.
He gave Gigli 2 1/2 stars...
Face/Off
08-02-03, 06:44 PM
Originally posted by Terrell
Ebert's knowledge of film is well known. But the guy has absolutely no practical experience with making films. He's written or co-written 3 films, two of which were absolutely god awful. Beneath the Valley of the Ultra Vixens and Beneath the Valley of the Dolls. The third one is called Up! I haven't seen it so I can't comment on it. But I imagine it's bad as well. So if Roger Ebert is going to sit his fat butt in a chair and criticize the work someone has poured their heart and soul into, sometimes deservedly so, then I'll criticize him when I think he deserves it.
Criticism and praise are cut from the same thread -- so where's your "if Roger Ebert is going to sit his fat butt in a chair and hail the worsk someone has poured their heart and soul into" line? Or is effort your bottom line?
Buford T Pusser
08-02-03, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by Rypro 525
thanks for the sig
Good deal.
Ebert, Meyer and Pusser-three Americans that helped make this country what it is today! A playground for women with large breasts.
joeydaninja
08-19-03, 04:20 PM
Ebert likes J. Lo, that's something I learned from dvdtalk.
Spooky
08-19-03, 04:48 PM
I'm still mad at Roger for giving COP & A HALF three stars, but giving THE UNTOUCHABLES only two.
God, I miss Gene Siskel...
Hokeyboy
08-19-03, 04:54 PM
I'm still mad at Roger for giving COP & A HALF three stars, but giving THE UNTOUCHABLES only two.Why are you so mad about Ebert expressing his opinions? It's not like he cut somebody's balls off and used them as castanets.
RyoHazuki
08-19-03, 06:42 PM
Die Hard: **
Die Harder: *** 1/2*
Unexcusable.
Suprmallet
08-19-03, 07:11 PM
Originally posted by William Fuld
Richard Roeper is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
So THAT'S how he got the job! Ebert has been programmed by the commies!
Buford T Pusser
08-19-03, 08:45 PM
Originally posted by Matt Millheiser
Why are you so mad about Ebert expressing his opinions? It's not like he cut somebody's balls off and used them as castanets.
Another Ebert sig for Rypro's collection!
Face/Off
08-20-03, 02:43 AM
Originally posted by RyoHazuki7
Die Hard: **
Die Harder: *** 1/2*
Unexcusable.
Yawn. I had no idea opinion was so non-subjective.
Spooky
08-20-03, 05:31 AM
Originally posted by Matt Millheiser
Why are you so mad about Ebert expressing his opinions? It's not like he cut somebody's balls off and used them as castanets.
I was just poking a little fun at his inconsistancies...I actually love Ebert, but I guess my tone didn't translate well to text.
Peep
08-20-03, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by jaeufraser
You can't compare one review to the next. His expectations for a movie like Tomb Raider are different than that of Godard's movie. he expects a fun little action romp with fun visuals from tomb raider, and with that, I suppose he got it so he gave it a thumbs up
Well said. He's one of the few reviewers that scores movies based on genres and expectations (which I appreciate). If I'm going to a summer popcorn movie, I want to know if it's a good summer popcorn movie. I don't want it compared to "Citizen Kane".
Buy: