"Where Movie Critics Get A Taste Of Their Own Medicine!"
|
|
| An interview with:
Roger Ebert by Herb Kane Published January 7, 2001 |
|
|
Almost everyone has heard of "Siskel & Ebert" - a TV show featuring film critics Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun-Times) and Gene Siskel (Chicago Tribune) who debated movies and rated each one with a "Thumbs Up" or "Thumbs Down." Sadly, in early 1999, Gene Siskel passed away and left his partner, Roger Ebert, to bear the burdens of their successful nationally syndicated TV show. Ebert re-named the show "Roger Ebert at The Movies" and invited a string of guest critics to the show each week to sit in place of Gene Siskel.
In September of 2000, Ebert finally picked a permanent co-host Richard Roeper, a fellow Chicago Sun-Times writer. The show is now called "Ebert & Roeper and the Movies." This broadcast institution is one America's longest-running programs - heading into its 25th year. The show is a national icon that took serious film criticism to the mainstream in a fun and entertaining way.
This interview is extra special to me because it was Roger Ebert who inspired the "Critic Doctor" column. In 1998, I read Ebert's scathing review of the movie "Patch Adams," a film about a doctor starring Robin Williams. Irritated by Ebert's commentary, I wrote a review of his review and sent it to him. He wrote back with a respectful and professional response and we had a brief discussion on the movie. Months later, I remembered our little debate and came up with the idea for this web site. How ironic that a critic who blasted a movie about a doctor inspired the "Critic Doctor."
Kane: Some people think of movie critics as arrogant, overly opinionated, mean people with pens. What advice do you have for those who take your opinion on a movie personally?”
Ebert: They should. It is a personal opinion. Critics are supposed to be subjective. Those who find another person with an opinion to be arrogant are being arrogant themselves, aren't they?
Kane: What movie did you write your very first review on and where was it published?
Ebert: In The
Daily Illini, student paper at the University of Illinois, I wrote
about La Dolce Vita, the Parent Trap, etc.
Kane: What review are you most
proud of and why?
Ebert: I'm pleased that on deadline, before any other reviews had appeared, I was absolutely right about "2001." I also like my "Bonnie and Clyde" review, written at a time when the movie was being written off in some quarters as violent trash.
Kane: What review are you least proud of and why?
Ebert: I have never been able to "get" "Brazil." It is not that I am ashamed of the review--it is that I was unable to engage with the movie. I felt excluded by it.
Kane: In your new 2000 book “I Hated, Hated, Hated This Movie” (Andrews McMeel Publishing) you said, “For years I had a law that I would give the zero star rating only to films I believe were immoral in one way or another.” What do you consider immoral in a film? Does the MPAA rating of a film effect your moral perception of the content?
Ebert: The MPAA rating is irrelevant. Moral considerations are reflected in each individual review, and should be seen on a case by case basis. If a movie is truly bad enough, I suppose that in itself would be immoral, but I don't get into theology on this.
Kane: Ever since I was a kid, I remember watching “Siskel & Ebert” battle it out on TV each week. Sadly your co-host, Gene Siskel, passed away in 1999. What did you like and dislike most about Gene?
Ebert: Such questions cannot easily be answered.
Kane: I heard you are collaborating on a web site for serious film criticism. Can you tell our readers more about it?
Ebert: Nothing is happening at the moment.
Kane: How does it feel knowing the Critic Doctor web site was inspired by you - Offended? Flattered? Numb?
Ebert: Intrigued.
|
|
Kane: How do you get loud people to shut up in a movie theater?
Ebert: Ask them. Usually it works.
Kane: Where's your favorite spot to sit in a movie theater?
Ebert: Twice as far back as the screen is wide.
Kane: When you go to a movie, with whom do you usually go with?
Ebert: My wife.
Kane: What three movies do you hate the most of all time?
Ebert: (Critic Doctor Note: See answer to next question)
Kane: What three movies are your most favorite of all time?
Ebert: I hate lists. I make one a year, of the year's ten best films, and every ten years I vote in the Sight and Sound poll. Lists are a device by editors to give the appearance of a story without the fact of one.
Kane:
Have you ever been punched or verbally
assaulted (in person) by someone in the movie industry because
of one of your reviews? If yes, who?
Ebert: Not often,
and not badly.
Kane: What question would you like to ask the Critic Doctor? Ask it and I'll answer it with the published interview.
Ebert: Why do so many people want to be movie critics?
Kane: First of all, I believe it is a combination of your TV show bringing film criticism to the mainstream public over the years and the impact of film critics on TV, radio and in newspapers. All of this inspired people to think more about movies and discuss what they've seen. Everyone's a critic, if you think about it. A lot of film-goers have fun talking about movies after they've watched one. Then technology evolved and the mainstream public became aware of the internet. I believe the internet is probably the single most reason why so many people want to be movie critics. It's because they can! Before the net, people would have to become a newspaper columnist or try to pitch themselves to publications - which is a very competitive business. The internet makes it easy for anyone to become a critic - young and old. I'm living proof.
-- CRITIC DOCTOR
|
|
|
|
|
|