Jess Franco died on April 2nd.
Roget Ebert died on April 4th.
Who's next? Has anyone called Ron Jeremy to check on his health?
Posted on 04/04/2013 12:45:23 PM PDT by EveningStar
Ebert, 70, who reviewed movies for the Chicago Sun-Times for 46 years and on TV for 31 years, and who was without question the nation’s most prominent and influential film critic, died Thursday in Chicago. He had been in poor health over the past decade, battling cancers of the thyroid and salivary gland.
(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...
He reviewed lame comedies? Who knew?
Hated Citizen Kane...never understood how it is one of the best eveh.
Have never seen Schindler’s List...no interest in seeing it either.
I’ve never seen The English Patient, either.
I did like Tommy Boy. Fat guy in little coat.....
Well it’s not just RE you disagree with then it’s just general good cinematic taste.
He's no longer in Obama's America?
Jess Franco died on April 2nd.
Roget Ebert died on April 4th.
Who's next? Has anyone called Ron Jeremy to check on his health?
I guess what I said was generally tongue in cheek. I never paid attention to his reviews.
I did go to “2 thumbs up” movies. I have no idea if I went to “2 thumbs down” movies.
When he became political I stopped paying attention.
And yes, you and I probably have WILDLY different taste in movies.
I enjoyed Gene Siskel.
He loved Obama’s America.
He started going down hill after Siskel died in 1999. The 2000 election drove him over the edge.
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19820602/REVIEWS/40819003/1023
"Blade Runner" is a stunningly interesting visual achievement, but a failure as a story....The visual environments he creates for this film are wonderful to behold, and there's a sense of detail, too; we don't just get the skyways and the monolithic skyscrapers and the sky-taxis, we also get notions about how restaurants, clothes and home furnishing will look in 2020 (not too different). "Blade Runner" is worth attending just to witness this artistry.
The movie's weakness, however, is that it allows the special effects technology to overwhelm its story. Ford is tough and low-key in the central role, and Rutger Hauer and Sean Young are effective as two of the replicants, but the movie isn't really interested in these people -- or creatures.
The obligatory love affair is pro forma, the villains are standard issue, and the climax is yet one more of those cliffhangers, with Ford dangling over an abyss by his fingertips. The movie has the same trouble as the replicants: Instead of flesh and blood, its dreams are of mechanical men.
Siskel was a good man, he took his Jewish faith very seriously.
He was batty in the mid-1990s as well. It can be found in his books and some of his reviews.
Re; Post#9
[silence]
Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro may.
I take it you’ve never seen films such as “Ikiru”, “Seven Samurai” “The French Connection”, “No Country For Old Men”, “The Remains Of The Day”, “The Bicycle Thief”, “Tokyo Story”, “Raise The Red Lantern”, “Dark City”, “The Shop On Main Street”, “Les Enfants du Paradis”, “Chinatown”, “Goodfellas” or other films?
“The English Patient” is interesting in that the novel it’s based on was considered unfilmable, and they pulled it off. I can say it’s a damned sight better than “Titanic” when it comes to the ‘doomed romance’ genre, lol!
“Citizen Kane” was a pioneering film, especially in terms of cinematography. A lot of the camera tricks we see in films originated in, or were perfected in, that film.
Siskel was scheduled to go on the Arsenio Hall show once and cancelled when he saw Hall fawn over Louis Farrakhan the night before.
RIP Roger Ebert. I enjoyed your reviews and your show with Gene.
No comment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.