History Creator / RogerEbert

[[http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/ Roger Joseph Ebert]] (June 18, 1942 – April 4, 2013) was a {{film}} critic who in his later life was probably the most famous film critic in the United States. He was the reviewer-in-chief at the ''UsefulNotes/{{Chicago}} Sun-Times'' from [[TheSixties 1967]] [[LongRunners until his death in 2013.]]

* CatchPhrase: "See you at the movies." These were also his sign-off words for [[FamousLastWords his last essay]].

** The best known example of Ebert's law that actually involves Ebert himself comes from a [[http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050811/REVIEWS/50725001/1023 review]] of ''Film/DeuceBigalow: European Gigolo''. Star Creator/RobSchneider took offense to an article by Patrick Goldstein of the ''UsefulNotes/LosAngeles Times'', pointing out that several major studios turned down the chance to finance the year's Best Picture nominees while financing a sequel to a crude sex comedy. After reading it, he took out a full-page ad in the ''Hollywood Reporter'' and called Goldstein a "hack" because he had never won a Pulitzer Prize.[[note]]In fairness, Schneider was more angry that Goldstein had trashed the movie without (apparently) even seeing it and mentioned his lack of a Pulitzer as a joke.[[/note]] In Ebert's review of the film, he taunted Schneider and said that he himself actually ''did'' win the Pulitzer, and thus by Schneider's criteria he was fully qualified to tell Schneider that "your movie sucks". The story took an unexpected turn after several back-and-forth barbs in the press. After one of Ebert's cancer surgeries, Schneider sent Ebert flowers and a "get well" card signed "Your Least Favorite Movie Star, Creator/RobSchneider". Ebert conceded that while Schneider may make bad movies, he's a good man. Schneider later [[https://www.rogerebert.com/chazs-blog/one-act-of-kindness-rob-schneider-and-roger admitted]] that Ebert's review of the film was "mean but fair" and that their exchanges helped Schneider reassess how he approached his work.

* WritersCannotDoMath: Ebert was consistent in translating a two-and-a-half star review (out of four) as a "marginal thumbs-down" on ''Siskel & Ebert'', and describing it in text as a "negative review". Two-and-a-half stars out of four is 62.5%, a passing grade by almost any definition, and certainly means there was more about the film to like than dislike.

** His ''Film/GIJoeRetaliation'' review reads:
--->'''Ebert:''' To say ''G.I. Joe: Retaliation'' is a video game for the big screen is to insult a number of video games that are far more creative, challenging and better-looking.
*** Mr. Ebert never was a fan of video games, either.

** The best known example of Ebert's law that actually involves Ebert himself comes from a [[http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050811/REVIEWS/50725001/1023 review]] of ''Film/DeuceBigalow: European Gigolo''. Star Creator/RobSchneider took offense to an article by Patrick Goldstein of the ''UsefulNotes/LosAngeles Times'', pointing out that several major studios turned down the chance to finance the year's Best Picture nominees while financing a sequel to a crude sex comedy. After reading it, he took out a full-page ad in the ''Hollywood Reporter'' and called Goldstein a "hack" because he had never won a Pulitzer Prize. In Ebert's review of the film, he taunted Schneider and said that he himself actually ''did'' win the Pulitzer, and thus by Schneider's criteria he was fully qualified to tell Schneider that "your movie sucks". The story took an unexpected turn after several back-and-forth barbs in the press. After one of Ebert's cancer surgeries, Schneider sent Ebert flowers and a "get well" card signed "Your Least Favorite Movie Star, Creator/RobSchneider". Ebert conceded that while Schneider may make bad movies, he's a good man.

* FourPointScale: Following the Sun-Times editorial policy, Ebert assigned his movie reviews four-star ratings, but often commented on the limitations of the system, such as in his blog post "[[http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/you-give-out-too-many-stars You Give Out Too Many Stars]]." He notes that his reviews do tend to skew positive, and that he considered 2.5 stars to be a pan[[note]]though he also once noted that 2.5 could register as a full 3 stars if said film was of interest in some way to the viewer, or they were a big fan of the genre/director/et.[[/note]]. He also wrote a lengthy series of appreciations of [[RogerEbertGreatMoviesList Great Movies]], all of which were given four stars. That said, he [[CausticCritic never hesitated to award low marks]] to [[RogerEbertMostHatedFilmList bad movies]], though for one to earn ''zero'' stars, he had to consider it not just bad but somehow immoral.

* FourPointScale: Following the Sun-Times editorial policy, Ebert assigned his movie reviews four-star ratings, but often commented on the limitations of the system, such as in his blog post "[[http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/you-give-out-too-many-stars You Give Out Too Many Stars]]." He notes that his reviews do tend to skew positive, and that he considered 2.5 stars to be a pan. He also wrote a lengthy series of appreciations of [[RogerEbertGreatMoviesList Great Movies]], all of which were given four stars. That said, he [[CausticCritic never hesitated to award low marks]] to [[RogerEbertMostHatedFilmList bad movies]], though for one to earn ''zero'' stars, he had to consider it not just bad but somehow immoral.

* ActuallyPrettyFunny: He wasn't the biggest fan of ''Film/DumbAndDumber'', but he admitted to laughing hard at the dead parakeet gag.

He was one of the major opponents to Colorization. He often liked DeliberatelyMonochrome films, and ones that were monochrome because of when they were made, because of the light and shadow effects. Ebert also protested censorship in the name of AvoidTheDreadedGRating or avoiding the dreaded X/NC-17 rating. He advocated for years for a properly trademarked '''A''' rating to replace X since that sounds more respectable, and basically called out the MPAA for trying to [[MediaWatchdog enforce American morality]] from behind the veneer of arbitrary letterings. (He'd hoped NC-17 would become a respectable alternative, and was disappointed when it didn't, thanks in no small part to the failure of ''Film/{{Showgirls}}.'') He was critical of what he saw as an overuse of 3D technology in movies.

Ebert loved movies, and this was shown in his reviews. He was a fairly lenient critic[[note]]On [[http://www.metacritic.com/critic/roger-ebert his Metacritic profile]], his average score for the 4,069 reviews that aggregator cites is around 71 percent, nearly twelve percentage points higher than the site's average.[[/note]] who liked a range of genres and was primarily concerned with whether or not a film was made with passion and craft. To him, even a "bad" movie was worthy of praise if those involved were sincere in their intent. Those who cynically ticked the necessary boxes earned his scorn. Doubly so if they did a bad job ticking those boxes. He also tended to rate films compared to others of their genre, not "overall"; ''Film/Superman'', for example, was pretty much the best superhero film going, but it was not on the same level as, for example, ''Film/TheGodfather''. Any subsequent superhero film would, at some level, be compared to ''Superman'', and so on.

Ebert loved movies, and this was shown in his reviews. He was a fairly lenient critic[[note]]On [[http://www.metacritic.com/critic/roger-ebert his Metacritic profile]], his average score for the 4,069 reviews that aggregator cites is around 71 percent, nearly twelve percentage points higher than the site's average.[[/note]] who liked a range of genres and was primarily concerned with whether or not a film was made with passion and craft. To him, even a "bad" movie was worthy of praise if those involved were sincere in their intent. Those who cynically ticked the necessary boxes earned his scorn. Doubly so if they did a bad job ticking those boxes.

* VolleyingInsults: A war of words erupted between ''Film/TheBrownBunny'' director Creator/VincentGallo and Ebert, with Ebert writing that ''The Brown Bunny'' was the worst film in the history of Cannes, and Gallo retorting by calling Ebert a "fat pig with the physique of a slave trader." Ebert then responded, paraphrasing a statement attributed to UsefulNotes/WinstonChurchill: "One day I will be thin, but Vincent Gallo will always be the director of ''The Brown Bunny''." Gallo then claimed to have put a hex on Ebert's colon, cursing the critic with cancer. Ebert then replied that [[InsultToRocks watching a video of his colonoscopy]] had been more entertaining than watching ''The Brown Bunny.'' [[note]] It should be noted here that Gallo went and re-edited ''The Brown Bunny''; Ebert's review of the revision is a complete 180-degree switch in tone, proclaiming that Gallo's editing made ''The Brown Bunny'' a totally different, and better film. Ebert even went so far as to say he was glad he saw the original cut, as flawed as he thought it was, so he was able to better appreciate the revised edition. [[/note]]

** He trashed ''Film/{{Splash}}'' just because he thought Creator/JohnCandy should have played the lead instead of Creator/TomHanks.

In 1975, Ebert teamed up with Creator/GeneSiskel, reviewer in chief at the ''Chicago Tribune'', to present a film review program called ''Opening Soon at a Theater Near You,'' the great grandfather of the VideoReviewShow, on local Creator/{{PBS}} station WTTW. The program went to the full PBS network as ''Sneak Previews'' in 1978; in 1982 ''Series/SiskelAndEbert'' moved to UsefulNotes/{{syndication}} on commercial stations across America, as a new but very similar program called ''At the Movies with Siskel and Ebert'' (or vice versa). Unexpectedly, this made Ebert one of the two most important movie critics in America. Because the show was televised, [[RuleOfPerception many more Americans saw it]] than read the reviews in the newspapers; because Ebert and Siskel had credentials in real newspapers in a major city first, and didn't review every movie favorably, they could be taken more seriously than most other movie reviewers on television. Siskel and Ebert's [[LikeAnOldMarriedCouple passive aggressive chemistry]] was the stuff of legend. It was often thought that due to their occasionally hostile on-screen presence when they disagreed, that the two hated each other. However, [[VitriolicBestBuds each considered the other a close friend,]] even if their relationship was competitive by nature. In fact, in 2009 on the tenth anniversary of Siskel's death, Ebert posted a [[http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/02/i_remember_gene.html touching remembrance]] of his friend on his blog.

* ShipperOnDeck: Ebert shipped Po & Tigress in his ''WesternAnimation/KungFuPanda2'' review, and [[SlashFic Jacob & Edward]] in his ''Film/TheTwilightSaga: Eclipse'' review.

* RantInducingSlight: Filmmakers invoking NotScreenedForCritics as a ''[[ItsNotSupposedToWinOscars defense]]'' of their work was a sore point for Ebert. Ebert's responses to Creator/KevinSmith and Creator/RobSchneider are two classic examples of this, and from 2005 to 2006, he instituted the "Wagging Finger Of Shame" for all movies that were not screened for critics (It was discontinued when Ebert realized Hollywood wasn't taking the "Wagging Finger Of Shame" seriously.)

** The best known example of Ebert's law that actually involves Ebert himself comes from a [[http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050811/REVIEWS/50725001/1023 review]] of ''Film/DeuceBigalow: European Gigolo''. Star Creator/RobSchneider took offense to an article by Patrick Goldstein of the ''UsefulNotes/LosAngeles Times'', pointing out that several major studios turned down the chance to finance the year's Best Picture nominees while financing a sequel to a crude sex comedy. After reading it, he took out a full-page ad in the ''Hollywood Reporter'' and called Goldstein a "hack" because he had never won a Pulitzer Prize. In Ebert's review of the film, he taunted Schneider and said that he himself actually ''did'' win the Pulitzer, and thus by Schnider's criteria he was fully qualified to tell Schneider that "your movie sucks". The story took an unexpected turn after several back-and-forth barbs in the press. After one of Ebert's cancer surgeries, Schneider sent Ebert flowers and a "get well" card signed "Your Least Favorite Movie Star, Creator/RobSchneider". Ebert conceded that while Schneider may make bad movies, he's a good man.

* CatchPhrase: "See you at the movies." It was also his sign-off words for [[FamousLastWords his last essay]].

He gained a bit of flak from the gamer community when [[http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/04/video_games_can_never_be_art.html he declared video games not to be an art form,]] but [[https://web.archive.org/web/20130122081546/http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/07/okay_kids_play_on_my_lawn.html he eventually came around]] and at least decided he's not in a position to judge them (although, despite popular opinion to the contrary, he had been known to play them). Despite that episode, he was considered as the most JustForFun/OneOfUs of major critics, as he admired [[{{Anime}} Japanese animated film]] and had an incredible knowledge of science fiction, which was among his favorite genres. While he claimed ignorance to a lot of TV shows due to his heavy schedule of writing and watching films, he found time to become a fan of the WWE (having found a fascination with wrestling after viewing ''Film/BeyondTheMat''), ''WesternAnimation/SouthPark,'' and ''WesternAnimation/AvatarTheLastAirbender.'' (During their 1979 review of ''Film/StarTrekTheMotionPicture,'' Gene suggested that he might not have cared about the characters since he wasn't a fan of the show. Roger said that he WAS a fan and he didn't care about them as presented in this film). Heck, he even gave WebVideo/TheNostalgiaCritic his due after seeing his tribute video to Siskel and him via a Twitter message (Nostalgia Critic creator Creator/DougWalker was so thrilled, he printed and framed it). Ebert also had a fondness of other film analysis and criticism, such as Tim Dirk's Filmsite.org (which Ebert frequently quoted) and WebVideo/RedLetterMedia; of the ''Film/RevengeOfTheSith'' review, Ebert stated: "I was pretty much sure I didn't have it with me to endure another review of [''Revenge of the Sith.''] Mr. Plinkett demonstrates to me that I was mistaken." This is especially interesting considering that said review criticized critics, specifically naming Ebert, who gave a free pass to Creator/GeorgeLucas based on prior successes and not his recent output of work.

[[CausticCritic His wrath, when deployed, was legendary.]] He published three compilations of bad reviews: ''[[Film/{{North}} I Hated, Hated, HATED This Movie!]]'' (reviews published in 1999 and earlier), ''[[Film/DeuceBigalow Your Movie Sucks]]'' (reviews published from 2000-2006) and ''[[Film/TransformersRevengeOfTheFallen A Horrible Experience of Unbearable Length]]'' (reviews published from 2006-2011). He printed annual compilations of his movie reviews from TheEighties onward, and wrote three books of essays about his favorite movies entitled ''The Great Movies''. These essays also available on his website in a condensed form. He also wrote Literature/EbertsGlossaryOfMovieTerms, ''Ebert's Little Movie Glossary'' and ''Ebert's Bigger Little Movie Glossary,'' which are books of FilmTropes in ''Literature/TheDevilsDictionary'' form. (An even bigger movie glossary is on his web page.) They could be considered a proto Wiki/TVTropes in a sense (and the {{Trope Namer|s}} for many).

** Part of his positive reception to films like ''Film/{{Angus}}'' and ''Film/RookieOfTheYear'' was that they were [=kid/teen=] films where the young heroes who got the victory spoils were like him: nerdy and unathletic, but good-natured.

He gained a bit of flak from the gamer community when [[http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/04/video_games_can_never_be_art.html he declared video games not to be an art form,]] but [[https://web.archive.org/web/20130122081546/http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/07/okay_kids_play_on_my_lawn.html he eventually came around]] and at least decided he's not in a position to judge them (although, despite popular opinion to the contrary, he has been known to play them). Despite that episode, he was considered as the most JustForFun/OneOfUs of major critics, as he admired [[{{Anime}} Japanese animated film]] and had an incredible knowledge of science fiction, which was among his favorite genres. While he claimed ignorance to a lot of TV shows due to his heavy schedule of writing and watching films, he found time to become a fan of the WWE (having found a fascination with wrestling after viewing ''Film/BeyondTheMat''), ''WesternAnimation/SouthPark,'' and ''WesternAnimation/AvatarTheLastAirbender.'' (During their 1979 review of ''Film/StarTrekTheMotionPicture,'' Gene suggested that he might not have cared about the characters since he wasn't a fan of the show. Roger said that he WAS a fan and he didn't care about them as presented in this film). Heck, he even gave WebVideo/TheNostalgiaCritic his due after seeing his tribute video to Siskel and him via a Twitter message (Nostalgia Critic creator Creator/DougWalker was so thrilled, he printed and framed it). Ebert also had a fondness of other film analysis and criticism, such as Tim Dirk's Filmsite.org (which Ebert frequently quoted) and WebVideo/RedLetterMedia; of the ''Film/RevengeOfTheSith'' review, Ebert stated: "I was pretty much sure I didn't have it with me to endure another review of [''Revenge of the Sith.''] Mr. Plinkett demonstrates to me that I was mistaken." This is especially interesting considering that said review criticized critics, specifically naming Ebert, who gave a free pass to Creator/GeorgeLucas based on prior successes and not his recent output of work.