was roger ebert actually any good as a critic?

No, but still better than his pal

>>87440661
Why do you think God took his jaw?

>>87440661
>Ebert called Conan the Barbarian "a perfect fantasy for the alienated preadolescent"

>>87440661
the other guy was better. Ebert always got too faggoty and moralistic about movies. He kicked up a stink over blue velvet being degrading to women like stfu go get laid you grandma fuckk

his commentary track for Dark City is 10/10
I just wish he'd done more of them

>>87440661

No, he just sucked the right people off.
Thats why he got chin cancer. From to much sucking dick. Micheal Douglas got it too from licking pussy.
Look it up.

>>87440766
Dark City sucks

OP here, just making sure. He's literally he embodiment of the pompous baby boomer with a complete incapacity for abstract though. I get the feeling nobody in the industry actually gave 2 fucks about what he had to say.

>>87440695
Robert Z'dar needed and equal

>>87440724

You do realize that young Ebert was a womanizer who got a lot ass right?

He used spend his time in clubs surrounded by women.

>>87440661

Yes. Now listen you brainlets, that's not saying he was always right or even had particularly great taste in film. But what he did have was a distinctive critical voice which engaged normalfags to actually think about film.

>>87440894
>I get the feeling nobody in the industry actually gave 2 fucks about what he had to say.
Herzog

>>87440661

He won a Pulitzer and was the first critic to do so. So obviously he is better than most.

>>87440827

You suck.

>>87440992

Patty Jenkins says she is very grateful to Ebert for helping her out when she made monster.

>>87441028
Yes

File: 1503756590317.jpg (438KB, 752x1082px) Image search: [Google]

438KB, 752x1082px

>>87440894
>I get the feeling nobody in the industry actually gave 2 fucks about what he had to say.
The guys who made this poster did.

>>87440707
>fantasy for the alienated preadolescent

Is there any other kind? At least in film and television "Mature Fantasy" is still an oxymoron.

>>87440963
Get back in the coffin, Roger

I always thought he was decent though his reviews for Blue Velvet and Dirty Harry are atrocious.
He was the best at reviewing dramas.

File: 1463996601163.jpg (38KB, 451x598px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 451x598px

>>87440661

No, but he worked on good porn movies.

>>87440661

He was the king of pleb opinions but I mean that in a good way.

>>87441166

It's true faggot. Also he wrote beyond the valley of the dolls which was based.

>>87440963
>famous person is surrounded by women

NOOOOOOOOO you're kidding

dudes still a virginal fag being famous =/= having game

What's Roger Ebert's favorite Spielberg movie?

Jaws.

>>87441310

> Famous

Not in his early days mate.

>>87440661
it's a shitty question op. There are 2 possible answers

>yeah, he was good, cuz he liked the same movies as i did

>no he wasn't cuz he didn't like movies i liked

>>87441441
who the fuck are you?

File: lynch.jpg (8KB, 319x162px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 319x162px

>>87440661
>Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert gave the film "two thumbs down" – though Lynch used this to his advantage by claiming it was "two more great reasons to see Lost Highway", with the 'two thumbs down' used in newspaper ads.

File: IMG_2421.jpg (225KB, 1024x987px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1024x987px

>>87440963
How?
Dude looked like a troll.

>>87442391
Link to picrel? I couldn't find it on youtube

>>87442608
already posted ITR it seems
>>87441063

>>87440707
Based

I usually disagree with his reviews. There is always something annoying he will write that will make me completely ignore his opinion. In a blow up review, he chooses to bash a generation as obsessed with self referential ironic slashers like it's the audience's fault it hasn't aged well. In another film's review, I can't remember which, he said that the film is good and the director had a good vision in his mind, but it was boring.
I don't know, I don't really trust him, it seems like he was too arrogant about his opinion.