Can You Guess the Movie Roger Ebert Disliked?

Pulitzer Prize-winning film critic Roger Ebert was renowned for his candid and often acerbic writing style, particularly when critiquing films he found lacking. Ebert’s succinct and cutting remarks about bad movies often offered more entertainment than the films themselves. He frequently revisited his earlier reviews to explain why certain movies captivated him, but his succinct critiques of poor films were no less impactful.

One of the most famous examples of Ebert’s sharp tongue is evident in his review of Roland Emmerich’s 1998 remake of Godzilla. The director, apparently vexed by Ebert’s lukewarm reception of his previous works like Stargate and Independence Day, named characters in the film after Ebert and his fellow critic, Gene Siskel. Emmerich’s version of “Ebert” and “Gene” served as comedic parodies rather than pivotal roles in the movie. Unsurprisingly, when Ebert attended the Cannes Film Festival to watch Godzilla, he bestowed it with a stinging 1.5-star review. He likened the experience to “attending a satanic ritual in St. Peter’s Basilica” and humorously added that he expected to be “squished like a bug by Godzilla.”

In addition to this example, Ebert’s critiques often showcased his ability to deconstruct films with a few devastating lines. For instance, he once characterized Adam Sandler’s career, asserting that Sandler should refrain from playing lead roles, arguing he was much better suited as a supporting character – the “best friend, or the creep, or the loser boyfriend.” Such unfiltered honesty was a hallmark of Ebert’s long career in film criticism.

Another notable appraisal from Ebert targeted Quentin Tarantino’s film techniques. Ebert felt that Tarantino often allowed his characters to indulge excessively in dialogue, especially in moments when they “should be unconscious from shock and loss of blood.” This kind of blunt assessment highlights Ebert’s straightforward approach to film criticism.

Ebert also wasn’t shy about expressing his distaste for certain actors’ performances or the films they starred in. He notably lambasted Andrew Dice Clay’s role in The Adventures of Ford Fairlane, suggesting the film could not be more damaging to Clay’s career even if it had been an intentional effort by someone who despised him. Similarly, he criticized Macaulay Culkin’s character in The Good Son, calling him “a very evil little boy” and lamenting that the character’s dialogue was unnaturally sophisticated for his age.

Madonna was another frequent target of Ebert’s wit. In his review of Shanghai Surprise, he bluntly declared that Madonna had cemented her reputation for starring in films that were ill-conceived from the outset. He often questioned the decision-making behind her film roles with biting sarcasm.

In yet another scathing review, Ebert described a film as “reprehensible, dismaying, ugly, artless, and an affront to any notion, however remote, of human decency.” His critiques often resonated with readers due to his ability to concisely and vividly express his disdain for cinematic missteps.

Despite his scathing reviews, Ebert’s critiques were not just about tearing films down. His passion for cinema was evident, as he sought to push the industry towards higher standards. Even when providing negative feedback, Ebert’s articulate and often humorous observations provided valuable insights into the art of filmmaking.

Indexing some of Ebert’s most memorable quips offers a glimpse into his influence on film criticism. His words have endured, serving as both entertainment and a guidepost for movie enthusiasts and critics alike. Few have wielded the pen with such sharpness and clarity as Roger Ebert, solidifying his legacy as a towering figure in the realm of film criticism.

Source: Roger Ebert