Roger Ebert's Last Spoken Words - Esquire interview - Page 2

Regardless of age, most critics ARE pretentious IMO.



Kael definitely belonged to the "pretentious" club.
But I do agree with her....Dumb and Dumber is hysterical.

For anyone interested in R.E. he will speak for the first time on Oprah Winfrey's show on Tue 3/2 CBS, in my market anyway.

Same here in the Bay Area, I set my DVR...

Gotta love technology.

Roger Ebert's New Voice

Thanks for the link, Aliens. That was very nice. And is that Mrs. Ebert? She seems like quite a lovely lady.

Yes, it's his wife of many years.

Aren't most critics failed writers whose judicious fodder is preying upon the success of others, whom, through their criticisms of others, just bespeaks their frustration against those who have (unlike the critic) clawed their way to the screen? (good or bad... any one who makes it to a screen has succeeded beyond the "critic".)

Critics use the creativity of others, as parasites do, to fuel their existences... don't they? They don't create anything in and of themselves. They wait to respond, after the creation, to judge. They are after-the-fact, quipsters... are they not?

Sorry to hear that their craft rubs you the wrong way but I never rely on a single voice, other than my own, to help me decide whether a piece I'm ask to spend my time and/or money on is worth it. I like to hear from and to read competing sources and then to form my own opinion.

YMMV

Mike, I was being philosophical for the most part, and logical as well. No need to be sorry because I don't consider critics have a legitimate "craft". Their sustenance is after all, what others create... there's no denying that (the logical part). As to parasitical references, that is my take on it. I was never an Ebert fan, ever. The craft you refer to is an opportunity for would-be writers to set themselves apart by demonstrating their writing skills... yet without the foundation of what it is they are writing about (the movie), they'd have nothing to say whatsoever.

I think that what irks me the most... now that I think about it... is that most critics try to set themselves as above the average viewer... as if they are smarter and more articulate than Joe Blow. And since I have a computer on my lap, I am voicing an opinion.

Ebert is way too over rated. He is pedantic, and really talking to himself and other critics. Not at all to the average Joe. He's communicating to his inner circle. Same as other critics do... and on that note, same as most in the movie-making industry.

hmmmm and this fits your Avatar review how?


now you are talking

The old Siskel and Ebert show convinced me to pay less attention to movie critics. Before the show, when I read a movie review, the reviewer would write as if he was making "the" judgment of the film. With S&E, though, one of them would sometimes say "you're wrong" after the other had opined. I also found out that neither one of them had a background in moviemaking--they just had unrelated college degrees. All of this taken together made it very clear that these are just people expressing opinions, and that their only "expertise" regarding films is their ability to articulate what they think.

Some movies are just turds.

No.

Recycle stereotypes much?

I guess this would be kind of like how most teachers are failed ___ fill in the blank ___. Because they don't create either.

In fact, these critics have actually succeeded where you have failed. They wrote something, got people to read it, and got paid.

"You're wrong!" (Couldn't resist.) Ebert did...he worked on three films for Russ Meyer, including BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS. (Which later found some of Ebert's dialogue quoted word-for-word in AUSTIN POWERS.)

Teachers can be very creative. And how do you know I have failed where others have succeeded??? I think you are making my point, brother.

He did do some script writing, but that doesn't make him an editor or director or actor or cinematographer or producer or production designer, etc. If he had real screenwriting expertise, he would have worked on a lot more than Z grade Russ Meyer stuff.

Perhaps...but he did have a background in the filmmaking process, regardless of what one thinks of Meyer's work, or the fact that Ebert wasn't an actor or director. And BEYOND is considered a bona-fide cult classic. By the way, there are many (probably more) talented screenwriters out there who've worked for years and have yet to see their efforts even make it to the screen. So Ebert was ahead of the curve in that respect.

The most you could say is that he has some "qualification" in scriptwriting, but it hardly makes him an expert.