EBERT AND ROEPER'S TOP TEN OF 2003

[xospec1alk]

Originally posted by: AbsolutDealage

Originally posted by: Parrotheader
We've got Mystic River at home right now.

You must be talking about the book, because the movie hasn't been released yet.

you sure about that? im sure i've seen it playing at my local theater...

 

[new2AMD]

Originally posted by: xospec1alk

Originally posted by: AbsolutDealage

Originally posted by: Parrotheader
We've got Mystic River at home right now.

You must be talking about the book, because the movie hasn't been released yet.

you sure about that? im sure i've seen it playing at my local theater...

i think mystic river was released a while ago. it may not even be in full release anymore.

EDIT:Release Date: October 8th, 2003 (limited release).

 

[FeathersMcGraw]

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Ebert and Roeper are like all critics. They're poseurs who need to like big, important movies rather than entertaining ones. In books, TV or movies, the critics have to protect their position by maintaining an aura of intelligence and insight. No critic can admit to liking "Ernest Goes to Camp" or "Cop Rock" because that degrades the value of their opinion.

I'm sorry, but to assert that Ebert is a poseur just because his tastes don't reflect the mainstream is ignorant. He watches more films in a year than some people see in their lifetimes; that perspective may make him harsher on some of the more cliched things out there, but he's hardly pretending to like strange films and hate mainstream ones "because that's what critics do".

FWIW, he gave Pirates of the Carribean 3/4, Return of the King 3.5/4, and Finding Nemo 4/4. His review isn't archived online, but I seem to recall him enjoying the "Ernest" series of films as well.

 

[GoodRevrnd]

Some of you have been presenting a little aura of intelligence (or something) by being anti-critic, but when movies cost $9.25/person I like a general idea of what someone else thinks about a movie.

That said, Ebert can suck my butt for his Happy Gilmore review. That movie rocked.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Murpheeee

Originally posted by: waylman
what's "Monster?"

It's the movie where Charlize Theron gets ugly and plays the lesbian serial killer......don't think its widely released yet

ok...was about to say..but any movie that has Theron as a lesbian has got to be worth seeing

 

[new2AMD]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: Murpheeee

Originally posted by: waylman
what's "Monster?"

It's the movie where Charlize Theron gets ugly and plays the lesbian serial killer......don't think its widely released yet

ok...was about to say..but any movie that has Theron as a lesbian has got to be worth seeing

No not this one...she looks terrible. In fact she looks like the girl she plays. There was a thread on this movie already.

 

[0roo0roo]

EBERT

1. "Monster"-haven't seen
2. "Lost in Translation"-overrated boring bullsh*t
3. "American Splendor"-semi amusing
4. "Finding Nemo"-amusing but no toy story
5. "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World"-pretty good- but not top ten material
6. "Mystic River"-boring pointless
7. "Owning Mahowny"-didn't see
8. "The Son (Le Fils)"-didn't see
9. "Whale Rider"-new zealand after school special
10. "In America"-didn't see

ROEPER

10. "Seabiscuit" -interesting but not top 10 material. detached.

WHERE THE F*CK IS ROTK.

 

[JHoNNy1OoO]

I saw it and it was a good movie. By the end of the movie you really forget it's Theron. Heck a friend of mine couldn't believe it was Theron to begin with, she looks really different. Add a little Chrisitina Ricci and this movie was well worth my 6 dollars.

I hope Theron gets nominated because she did an incredible job.

 

[atom]

I think it's really funny people berating Ebert about not liking mainstream, entertaining movies when the 2nd highest grossing movie of the year is #4 on his list.

 

[pulse8]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
EBERT

1. "Monster"-haven't seen
2. "Lost in Translation"-overrated boring bullsh*t
3. "American Splendor"-semi amusing
4. "Finding Nemo"-amusing but no toy story
5. "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World"-pretty good- but not top ten material
6. "Mystic River"-boring pointless
7. "Owning Mahowny"-didn't see
8. "The Son (Le Fils)"-didn't see
9. "Whale Rider"-new zealand after school special
10. "In America"-didn't see

ROEPER

10. "Seabiscuit" -interesting but not top 10 material. detached.

WHERE THE F*CK IS ROTK.

I guess you're the anti-critic critic.

 

[bo0]

Besides Finding Nemo, WTF!. And what happen to LOTR.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
EBERT

1. "Monster"-haven't seen
2. "Lost in Translation"-overrated boring bullsh*t
3. "American Splendor"-semi amusing
4. "Finding Nemo"-amusing but no toy story
5. "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World"-pretty good- but not top ten material
6. "Mystic River"-boring pointless
7. "Owning Mahowny"-didn't see
8. "The Son (Le Fils)"-didn't see
9. "Whale Rider"-new zealand after school special
10. "In America"-didn't see

ROEPER

10. "Seabiscuit" -interesting but not top 10 material. detached.

WHERE THE F*CK IS ROTK.

I guess you're the anti-critic critic.

i guess you missed the point of such a post.

what did you expect. an "uh huh" comment?

have you seen more of their top 10 then i have? do you agree? well you don't say you wise ass. why? because your too busy being an ass.

 

[Lorax]

ebert says in his mailbag that only movies he gave 4 stars to are considered for top 10 of the year. rotk got 3.5.

also says he favors lesser known movies over mainstream ones.

 

[Cfour]

Originally posted by: jfall
I always disagree with ebert and blowper's picks

I usually read their reveiws, and go watch the ones they don't like.

 

[Sid59]

cry and sob .. get over it .. they aren't geeks and didn't think ROTK was good.

 

[royaldank]

Originally posted by: jjsole

Originally posted by: jurzdevil
why do people care about critics? people value their opinions so much when i feel that they have failed at life. they cant do anything so they sit back and just say what everyone else should do or follow.

I've never heard anyone rave about movies ebert has given 1.5 stars. No one can see every movie, so if you find a reviewer that you often agree with they are very helpful.

Most people don't read reviews properly. It doesn't matter all that much if you agree with whether or not they liked the film. A good reviewer will give enough info on why they have that opinion. Not everyone agrees. However, good reviewers are able to explain why they didn't like it so that the reader can make their own decision.

Consider reading a good reviewer for a few months. Compare how you liked movies versus what they liked about movies. Whether or not agree, you should be able to tell if you'd like the movie. Say he didn't like the silly, dumbed down humour of Happy Gilmour. You think, "I love goofy Adam Sandler sh!t." At that point, the reviewers job is done. You should probably check out the movie. Who cares if he liked it?

 

[SackOfAllTrades]

I bet if they had a top 11 list, <insert your movie here> would be on that list!

 

[rh71]

Where's HONEY on there ? Jess Alba looked great in it !

Oh wait... they're rating the movie itself ? Who's ever heard of that ?!

(post #9999 refers to JA - had to be done)

(EDIT>> I thought 10000 posts was lifer? Guess it's 10001 <<)

 

[CubicZirconia]

Originally posted by: royaldank

Originally posted by: jjsole

Originally posted by: jurzdevil
why do people care about critics? people value their opinions so much when i feel that they have failed at life. they cant do anything so they sit back and just say what everyone else should do or follow.

I've never heard anyone rave about movies ebert has given 1.5 stars. No one can see every movie, so if you find a reviewer that you often agree with they are very helpful.

Most people don't read reviews properly. It doesn't matter all that much if you agree with whether or not they liked the film. A good reviewer will give enough info on why they have that opinion. Not everyone agrees. However, good reviewers are able to explain why they didn't like it so that the reader can make their own decision.

Consider reading a good reviewer for a few months. Compare how you liked movies versus what they liked about movies. Whether or not agree, you should be able to tell if you'd like the movie. Say he didn't like the silly, dumbed down humour of Happy Gilmour. You think, "I love goofy Adam Sandler sh!t." At that point, the reviewers job is done. You should probably check out the movie. Who cares if he liked it?

In reference to my above post, I just want to make it clear that I'm not trying to discredit Ebert because he happened to dislike a movie that I thought was great. I understand that everyone has his/her own opinion. I was simply trying to point out that there are plenty of movies out there that Ebert gave 1.5 stars that people have "raved" over.

 

[MrBond]

Originally posted by: Sid59
cry and sob .. get over it .. they aren't geeks and didn't think ROTK was good.

They both though the movie was well done, they just weren't fans of the story itself (in the past or now).

 

[Sid59]

Originally posted by: MrBond

Originally posted by: Sid59
cry and sob .. get over it .. they aren't geeks and didn't think ROTK was good.

They both though the movie was well done, they just weren't fans of the story itself (in the past or now).

yeah i think so too. there are tons of entertaining movies but if it doesn't make me wanna see it again, i don't think it's a great top 10 movie.

 

[DT4K]

I probably agree with Ebert more than most other critics.
And yes, I have seen him give good reviews to plenty of movies that were stupid comedies and not at all "works of art".
He doesn't seem to have anything against mindless entertainment as long as it is really entertaining.

But to not have the absolute best movie of the year even on your top ten list?
That is just pathetic.

 

[CFster]

Gotta love all the people wondering where ROTK is.

Whoever said it was a good movie?

 

[50]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
There's only one movie on either list that I would even go see. "Master and Commander..."

+Finding Nemo for me. The rest of those movies really aren't that mainstream and I haven't heard of any of them (except lost in translation).

BTW: I'm pretty sure Mystic River was filmed down my street! Charlestown Represent

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: CFster
Gotta love all the people wondering where ROTK is.

Whoever said it was a good movie?

its just an opinion. its not as if i've not seen some of his top 10, i've seen half, which is probably above average, and of those i don't consider any of them above rotk in terms of quality.