He will most definitely be missed.
Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
131–140 of 171 posts
Re: Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing wrong with film criticism. Ebert's 4-star ratings are even a good heuristic for picking something to watch. All of his "great movies" are generally recognized as such. And he certainly knew a lot more details about film than probably anyone else. The problem with Ebert's reviews is that they offer very little in the way of insight, analysis, or depth. Instead, they are generally straightforward exposi…
If you think Ebert only wrote starred reviews and had TV shows, then you are very wrong, and you have missed out. That's what he is most known for, but his extensive writings and lectures on film go as deep as anyone else in the field.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Film_studies_journals
Re: Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
#133Well, fuck.
Re: Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
#134What can you say about a film reviewer that gives Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace 3.5 out of 4 stars? Useless. I don't get all this praise I'm reading here. Despite being witty, a national treasure, and whatever, he had one core job to do, and he was terrible at it.
The trick is to actually read his writing and ignore the stars. The stars are secondary, and he says as much - he only attaches them to reviews because the customers demand them. See, here's the thing: Ebert was great as a writer, not as a movie star-giving guy.
Re: Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
#135Fitzgerald said "the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." Ebert seemed to have a knack for thinking all the thoughts simultaneously, and then getting their product onto a page: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/win_ben_steins_mind.... http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2013/03/how_i_am_a_roman_cat... One of t…
Wow. The Fitzgerald quote is amazing. Thanks for sharing. As a kid growing up in a poor, rural community, I wasn't exposed to much intellectual writing. The exception was the reprint in the local paper of Ebert's movie reviews, and of course seeing him on one of the two channels that came in on the antenna. When so many around me thought that being dissatisfied with the intellectual equivalent of McDonald's was eliti…
Particularly relevant I feel in a world of comment thread polemics
Re: Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What can you say about a film reviewer that gives Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace 3.5 out of 4 stars? That he enjoyed it and you didn't? Some people really love that film, but I'm perfectly willing to accept that you don't. You should be just as willing to accept that others do. Your comment sucks.
> That he enjoyed it and you didn't? This is what a film reviewer does? He liked it watching it, so it gets a high score? How about whether the readers of his review would like it? > Your comment sucks. This is HN, not reddit.
Your continued thwapping on his score of the film that you oh-so-despise betrays your obvious fault in that you only cared about his reviews when they weren't to your liking, because anybody who's read Ebert for any length of time knows that he hated the scoring and added it against his will. All of his scores must be taken in the context of the review, and he always said (nay, demanded) as much. In the context of the review, you know, the words he wrote describing his experience, we find this:
[...] the characters in "The Phantom Menace" inhabit a plot that is little more complex than the stories I grew up on in science-fiction magazines. The whole series sometimes feel like a cover from Thrilling Wonder Stories, come to life. The dialogue is pretty flat and straightforward, although seasoned with a little quasi-classical formality, as if the characters had read but not retained "Julius Caesar." I wish the "Star Wars" characters spoke with more elegance and wit (as Gore Vidal's Greeks and Romans do), but dialogue isn't the point, anyway: These movies are about new things to look at.
It's almost as if he understands the film's flaws or something! It's a completely different perspective when you consume his opinion as it's meant to be consumed. He spoke out very strongly, all his life, against people like you who walked away with the score as a conclusion (for good reason, obviously).
I originally said all that and replaced it with "Your comment sucks.", because I knew you'd fight with me on this, even though it's entirely pointless. I am aware this is Hacker News, but thank you for the patronizing reminder. Your comment still sucks. Your followup sucks, too, particularly the "go back to Reddit" tone (the irony of a person describing Roger Ebert as "useless" on Hacker News, then pulling the Hacker News card to criticize my comment is not lost on me).
Re: Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function This is the same guy who said "video games cannot be art, and I will not consider debate about it ". The second part in particular was what I found disturbing.
I admired him for that. He's not a technophobe. It was a quirky, provocative position to take, and not the easy one. I don't think games had any reason to feel threatened by him.
Re: Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
#138Fitzgerald said "the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." Ebert seemed to have a knack for thinking all the thoughts simultaneously, and then getting their product onto a page: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/win_ben_steins_mind.... http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2013/03/how_i_am_a_roman_cat... One of t…
the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function This is the same guy who said "video games cannot be art, and I will not consider debate about it ". The second part in particular was what I found disturbing.
He also clarifies that he thinks video games can in principle be art, but that no video game yet made could hold its own among the great works of art.
Re: Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
#139Well, fuck.
I probably shouldn't have upvoted you, but that really sums up my feeling. Ebert was another old man who I loved, and they seem to keep dying. Which makes sense. Maurice Sendak, Kurt Vonnegut, Paul Newman, my Grandpa... folks who populated my childhood and who I never really pictured leaving. Well, fuck.
Re: Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer
#140Fitzgerald said "the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." Ebert seemed to have a knack for thinking all the thoughts simultaneously, and then getting their product onto a page: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/win_ben_steins_mind.... http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2013/03/how_i_am_a_roman_cat... One of t…
Well, Aristotle said something very similar: It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.