RPGFan Message Boards

The Rest => General Discussions => Topic started by: Ashton on April 04, 2013, 04:26:46 PM

Title: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Ashton on April 04, 2013, 04:26:46 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/movies/roger-ebert-film-critic-dies.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Tooker on April 04, 2013, 04:42:17 PM
That is a bummer.  He had just recently announced that he was cutting back his reviewing because he was so sick.

I know that gamers generally found themselves on the opposite side of the "art" issue from him, but he was still a cool, interesting guy who I think appreciated movies just for being fun more than a lot of critics do.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Yoda on April 04, 2013, 11:36:07 PM
He gave Shoot 'em Up 3.5 stars so I will always love him.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Dice on April 05, 2013, 01:35:39 AM
^ love that movie.

Yeah, I like the "thumbs up/down" approach.  It's simple and based more on general entertainment than ever-lasting appeal.  Enough writers do the latter.

I give him credit for fighting the good fight against cancer and really giving it all until the end.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Yoda on April 05, 2013, 10:44:12 AM
I loved watching Siskel and Ebert when I was a kid.

Check out how out of control the into was
http://youtu.be/UVCA9_OxNio

So goddamn jazzy it bleeds late 80s early 90s all over your computer. Seriously it's practically the Perfect Strangers intro.

Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: insertnamehere on April 05, 2013, 09:36:16 PM
I never really got the popularity of that thumbs up/down thing, it seemed even worse than giving out review scores, as if any movie movie could be summed up one way or the other but never in between.
And it was pretty ironic that he claimed movies were often art for being emotional, and he never saw that in video games.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Starmongoose on April 05, 2013, 09:37:42 PM
He was an old man who probably still saw videogames being akin to Tetris or Pacman, or at worst CoD.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Dice on April 05, 2013, 09:40:21 PM
I never really got the popularity of that thumbs up/down thing, it seemed even worse than giving out review scores, as if any movie movie could be summed up one way or the other but never in between.
And it was pretty ironic that he claimed movies were often art for being emotional, and he never saw that in video games.

Depends on the game.  Likely when he saw it, it was still really kiddy looking, and yeah, he was old -- not exactly part of his demographic.  Perhaps something like Journey or whatever would have changed his mind.

But like I said earlier with the thumbs thing:
I like the "thumbs up/down" approach.  It's simple and based more on general entertainment than ever-lasting appeal.  Enough writers do the latter.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Tooker on April 05, 2013, 10:55:54 PM
He actually felt like the interactive nature of video games disqualified them from being art.  Ebert's opinion, overly simplified, was that art is a thing to be consumed and experienced, not a thing in which you participate.  He definitely saw impressive things in video games, and as far as I know, he wasn't saying games are bad or unsophisticated, or even necessarily "not as good" as things that are art.  He just saw them as a different category of stuff.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Kevadu on April 05, 2013, 11:25:44 PM
There's tons of "performance art" that has audience participation.  Not a new thing.

Look, I like a lot of stuff Ebert did and I don't want to badmouth a dead man, but I can't help but think you're being way too kind.  I've read the stuff he wrote about video games and was of it was extremely ignorant.  Not stupid or anything, but ignorant.  It's pretty obvious that he didn't play video games and didn't really know much about them.  Which is fine, I don't expect everyone to play video games or understand video games.  But you shouldn't write about them without doing your homework first, and he didn't.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Yoda on April 05, 2013, 11:45:08 PM
It didn't bother me, what he said. Because in the grand scheme of things, who gives a shit?
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: PotRoast on April 08, 2013, 03:20:04 PM
There are a few reviewers of media that have had a tremendous impact not only on what media I consume, but how I consume said media. Roger Ebert is one of them, and probably the most important overall. Within the last year or so I had gotten to the point where I no longer really read his reviews unless I'd already seen it, but still checked his website frequently either way. So in a sense, I had moved on from needing his input. That said, I still value it greatly. And while his output has been gigantic, it does sadden me that it is now complete.

---

I think the whole business about his 'anti-videogame' opinion pieces has always been overblown. Especially because in the end, Roger effectively admitted defeat (something hard to get a man as stubborn and full of pride as Roger to do). So yeah, Roger was wrong about video games, but his argument was fascinating, well-written, and thought provoking. It was challenging to deal with, and few handled it successfully (I can't remember a single one now that I thought did a decent job rebuking it). Most it just turned into blubbering idiots.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Yggdrasil on April 08, 2013, 08:02:13 PM
It didn't bother me, what he said. Because in the grand scheme of things, who gives a shit?

A lot of people did...
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: MeshGearFox on April 08, 2013, 08:18:23 PM
Rule of threes, guys.

We got Roger and Maggie. Who's next?
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Agent D. on April 08, 2013, 08:30:41 PM
A critic, a prime minister.....I think next is a video game icon.

Crossing my fingers for Robert Kotick.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Yoda on April 09, 2013, 01:08:07 AM
Rule of threes, guys.

We got Roger and Maggie. Who's next?

I dunno, how you feelin' these days?
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Hathen on April 09, 2013, 02:15:40 AM
Because in the grand scheme of things, who gives a shit?

In the grand scheme of things, people create art to a leave a legacy/memory through their works. When you condemn something to not be art you are saying it isn't worthy of being preserved as an form of human expression to be valued through time. If I was a game developer I think I'd be insulted by that line of thought.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Yggdrasil on April 09, 2013, 04:53:29 AM
I wouldn't take what Yoda says too seriously. Though, that comment did sound very ignorant.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Dice on April 09, 2013, 12:37:57 PM
While I agree that in an actual conversation that wouldn't be a good comment to make.  However, if (and I'm assuming) he meant that if we're here to talk and respect (than to piss on) the memory of Roger Ebert, then I guess in the grand sceme of things, it doesn't matter.

Of course....Maybe it's the art-bias in me; I consider just about everything art, and I don't like when people discount anything from potentially being art (even shitty fucking dumb installation art that tries to transcend what art and our boundaries for reality art or whatever the shit.... I hate it, but fine, I'll call it art...to some people >=( ... )
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: insertnamehere on April 09, 2013, 01:11:11 PM
Did he share an opinion about installation art?
relevant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh23gVksliQ)
I guess in a way, calling mediums themselves art is too broad and everything should be considered art case by case.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Blace on April 09, 2013, 02:02:39 PM
Relevant, and I agree with this:

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/the-guns-of-navarro-in-tribute-to-roger-ebert/1100-4617/
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Dice on April 09, 2013, 03:19:08 PM

relevant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh23gVksliQ)

Hahaha that's one of my favorite movies
I'm pretty sure I've taken on the phrase "emotionally erect" into my personal vocab and I've said it a few times here.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Tooker on April 09, 2013, 03:30:00 PM
The reveal of the actual painting at the end is what really sells it to me.  So awesome.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Yoda on April 09, 2013, 03:33:53 PM
Relevant, and I agree with this:

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/the-guns-of-navarro-in-tribute-to-roger-ebert/1100-4617/

Woah that was great. I've never seen that movie. I'll check it out for sure now.

Also, My Blue Heaven is great
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Desert Walker on April 09, 2013, 03:40:45 PM
The reveal of the actual painting at the end is what really sells it to me.  So awesome.

Indeed.  Most awesome scene.  I'll probably check out that movie now.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: insertnamehere on April 09, 2013, 05:45:14 PM
The reveal of the actual painting at the end is what really sells it to me.  So awesome.

Indeed. Most awesome scene. I'll probably check out that movie now.

You never seen it?
I actually prefer this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7reNuHNoSNg) one.
or this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoU39Rpp4FI)
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Dice on April 09, 2013, 06:06:10 PM
The reveal of the actual painting at the end is what really sells it to me.  So awesome.

Indeed. Most awesome scene. I'll probably check out that movie now.

You never seen it?
I actually prefer this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7reNuHNoSNg) one.
or this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoU39Rpp4FI)

Oh pointy birds, oh pointy-pointy.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: SonicDeathMonkey on April 09, 2013, 06:20:55 PM
I was genuinely sad to hear this news... they used to print his reviews in The Post-Standard (central new york newspaper) and I would read them every week... I didn't always agree with him but his opinion was always worth hearing out...

Anyway do you guys have any particular film critics you read?
I dig theflickfilosopher.com but she can go a bit overboard with her feminist overreactions at times (i.e. she slammed I Love You, Man for promoting negative stereotypes of how men should behave.. which I didn't take away from that movie at all..) but I generally enjoy her reviews..
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Starmongoose on April 09, 2013, 06:23:00 PM
I only read and trust GrimReality's reviews.

So, I don't see many movies.
Title: Re: Roger Ebert dies
Post by: Blace on April 10, 2013, 12:59:48 PM
James Berardinelli is my favorite.

http://www.reelviews.net/movies.php