MovieChat Forums > Life Itself (2014) Discussion > have some respect

have some respect

posted 11 years ago by remembervhs
6 replies | jump to latest

rogerebert.com should be renamed. the reviews there are embarrassingly bad (in terms of writing and opinion). using the name ebert to promote the mediocre talent writing for that site today is an insult. the old site should be archived.

this movie disgusts me for a different reason. an hour and a half glorification of a man and interviews with people he knew saying how amazing he was. sad.

roger ebert left behind his legacy. he wrote a lot of books and a lot of reviews. this film encourages people to forget his writing and focus on the myth of the saint.

don't watch the movie. read his reviews. they're funny, incisive, and even if you disagree with them, quite enjoyable.

[–] emncaity 11 years ago

Haven't seen the film yet, but this smells like a potentially very good point, depending on what the film is like. I'm inclined to think Ebert himself might've been mortified at the idea of people paying so much attention to him personally rather than to the films he loved (and hated), and what he wrote about them.

Like I didn't already want to see this film badly enough...

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TheAdlerian 11 years ago

I agree.

When someone I like dies, that's it. I like to focus on what they did while alive and remember them that way.

I didn't agree with most of his reviews, due to him rating them based on their politics, but I really enjoyed his writing. I thought him very witty and hip most of the time.

Anyway, when he was alive, he was alive, now he's dead and I don't want to watch a film that will just depressingly remind me he's dead.

[–] Gus-69 11 years ago

Have you seen it?

----------------------
http://mulhollandcinelog.wordpress.com/

[–] TheAdlerian 11 years ago

My point is that I don't want to because the guy practically just died and I'd prefer to remember recently dead people when they were alive.

[–] DPatts 11 years ago

That's fair. And they spent a good amount of time on his illness partially due to Ebert's wishes. He was devastated when he found out about Siskel and that Siskel hadn't shared his illness with him. Ebert truly respected and loved Siskel and he looked up to him as an older brother. He didn't want the same thing to occur with himself, which is one reason he was so open about what was happening with him.

I grew up watching Ebert and Siskel and have read a number of Ebert's books, yet I think the film was worth watching, to hear stories from many of his friends from the days at Univ of Il and his early days at the Sun Times. And I don't think he was glorified. Also there is a good amount of time spent on the development of Siskel and Ebert's relationship and their shows over the years, with some footage never seen before showing them arguing off camera. And I think the comments from Siskel's wife and the executive producer of their first show together were really interesting.

They did cover some about Ebert's blog in later years and how he found a new voice. I can say that I developed a greater level of respect for Ebert reading it over the years. And the fact that he was sort of on the leading edge of technology, being one of the first to use facebook, twitter as an outreach to a greater audience.

I do agree about ebert.com and I wish they'd leave the current reviews off but I suppose that partially helps drive traffic to the site and Ebert was always one to promote up and coming writers and filmmakers, so I am sure it follows his own wishes.