Rating: 
Summary: One of the best movie books out there
Review: I absolutely love this book.Roger Ebert is by far the best film critic out there.He beats the hell out of Leonard Maltin (who writes terrible reviews ).He also has a great sense of humor.He gives you very helpful and informational reviews that Maltin doesn't.He writes very interesting summaries about the movie he reviews.They really do help out a lot.Although he did give some good movies bad reviews (Friday The 13th Part 2,Phantasm II), just about every other review he writes is helpful.There also very funny.Overall,I highly recommend you go out and buy this book right NOW! If your looking for a helpful movie review and/or need a good laugh,BUY IT!
Rating:
Summary: Great book for movie lovers
Review: I found this book very enjoyable. It is a collection a past reviews written by Roger Ebert of movies he did not care for. Most movies on this least are not a suprise but there are a few. Check out his review of Blue Velvet, a film considered be a classic by most David Lynch fans. Many of the reviews are quite humorous and remind you of movies you have all but forgotten you wasted time watching. This book is well worth reading, I highly recommend it.
Rating:
Summary: I Loved, Loved, Loved This Book
Review: This is Roger Ebert's greatest book. Everything about it is absolutely splendid, from the cover photograph, to the last word of the index. I have always been a fan of bad movies, and I enjoy seeing what doesn't work cinematically as much as what does. This is a collection of Ebert's best reviews on the subject of what decidedly does not work. Ebert is always a quick wit, and though I don't always agree with him, I always find his writing insightful to illuminating his point of view. In this book, though, I believe that I am in complete agreement on all the movies that I have seen. Indeed, some of these reviews are so well written and intriguing, I had to see the film in question just to know if it could be that bad. For instance after reading about the silly character names, the telepathic parrots and the man eating vegetables, I just HAD to see "At The Earth's Core". It is unquestionably as wretched as Ebert says, and I delighted in its badness. I have now set my sights on "North", but that is allegedly much harder to watch. If you want an accounting of mostly big budget cinematic fiascoes, this is the book for you. I hope Ebert writes another book soon called 'More Movies I Hated, Hated, Hated.'
Rating:
Summary: My favorite book by my favorite movie reviewer
Review: Maybe it's just me but I've always been more entertained when Mr. Ebert pans a movie then when he praises one. And oh boy, is there a lot in here for me to enjoy! This book delivers on the promise made by the title and then some. Buy it if you are a fan of Roger Ebert, buy it if you like reading well written reviews, buy it if you like seeing movies get their balloons burst. Whatever the reason, buy it. You will not be disappointed.
Rating: 
Summary: Where is Firestorm?
Review: I am disappointed that Roger Ebert did not think Firestorm was one of the worst movies ever. 1. Howie Long acting, need I say more?
2. The main character saves the world - boring and predictable.
3. The filming of the movie was horrible.
4. The special effects must have been from the 1980's. The computer annimation used to make the fire in the movie was one of the worst special effects I have ever seen in a movie.
5. Firestorm had some of the worst dialogue in any movie I've seen.
Rating: 
Summary: I hated, hated, hated this book.
Review: I hated, hated, hated this book. Well, no, I didn't "hate" it, but other than a few amusing observations about movies Ebert didn't like, this collection of negative reviews of bad flicks just isn't worth the time. Most of the movies he pans have been all together forgotten by now, even by avid filmgoers, and is anyone going to consider renting "North," the movie Ebert "hated, hated, hated" to see if what he has to say about it is fair? I think not. Stick to the Movie Yearbook.
Rating: 
Summary: short but sweet
Review: great book, will definatly give you a good laugh and let you know which movies not to sit down and watch, or acctually what movies to sit down and watch cause we all know its fun watching a really bad movie sometimes, to point out problems and laugh at (aka Dead Poets Society, god i hated that movie, just glad roger finally had the guts to say something) so get this book im sure you'll enjoy it
Rating:
Summary: Hours of Sinful Entertainment
Review: He HATED those movies. HATED them. AHH! It would be easy perhaps to portray this book as a useless rant from a self-indulgent critic, but here's the catch: Ebert is a thoughtful, insightful, and absolutely hilarious critic. And he knows how to write. Honestly, I havn't seen many of the movies in this book, but have sat down and read for many hours of entertainment, pure and sinful. Ebert is insulted by these movies, they're a waste of his and our time, and so isn't reading the book also a waste? No! Well, it can be a guilty pleasure if you're used to reading Tolstoy and other great authors in western literature (like me? umm, no), but this book is worth while for the pure entertainment value of his humorous and throughly intelligent wrath. This is a guy who respects--and has built a life around--movies, and he really, REALLY resents an awful one.
Allow me to quote: "I hated this movie. Hated hated hated hated hated this movie. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it. Hated the sensibility that thought anyone would like it. Hated the implied insult to the audience by its belief that anyone would be entertained by it." What movie? Well you'll have to get the book. (Hint: p. 262) And it's on TV a lot. In the late morning.
Anyway, the reviews, believe it or not, are all quite distinctive (many are more in-depth than the above quote). Ebert is a great critic with a great sense of humor that seldom comes through as it does in this book. For movie lovers and casual fans alike, anyone will be seriously (ha, ha!)entertained by the razor-sharp commentary of this book.
Allow me to leave you with a parting thought:
"[This] is the first movie I have seen that does not improve the sight of a blank screen viewed for the same amount of time..."
Rating:
Summary: Should be retitled "I hate, hate, hate, Robin Williams"
Review: One of the reviewer mentioned that buying this book is a waste because most of the reviews can be read for free on the suntimes website. Another reason not to buy this book is because you can get access to the full index right here on Amazon. Yet another reason not to buy this book is the fact that Ebert seems to be biased unfairly against certain stars. I haven't even heard of let alone seen most of these movies but it seems that a disproportionate number of the ones I have seen star Robin Williams. How could anyone HATE "Dead Poets Society" Not only hate it, but give a movie like the "Emperor's Club" that is a shameless derivative a higher rating? It can only be because he dislikes Robin Williams. As for the rest that I have seen my reactions range from "Amen!", to "Lighten up, what were you expecting?" to "what were you thinking?" And for the record, I know I'm not in good company on this, but "In Dreams" does not belong here. Rent it and judge for yourself. I know it's a conventional thriller, but I think it has a distinct visual style thanks to Neil Jordan's direction. His other films may be more cerebral but they lack the startling and inventive visuals of this neglected and criminally underrated film. Watch "End of the Affair", too. It's just as stunning.
Rating:
Summary: Lots of fun, could have been twice as long
Review: I picked up this book in a book store while my girlfriend was shopping. I sat in a chair and read for a while. When she finished and said she was going to another store, I said "I'll just sit here and read this." She came back an hour later and I was still reading, so I figured I should buy the book. I couldn't put it down because I was FINALLY reading real criticism. Plenty of movie critics are just cheerleaders; they praise every major Hollywood movie, no matter how brain-dead it is. But Roger Ebert has the guts (or the clout, as America's most powerful film critic) to slam a movie when it deserves it. And, let's face it, a LOT of movies from the past 20 years are very, very bad. Ebert doesn't make the mistake of picking on low-budget trash. That's like kicking a man when he's down. Instead, he gives zero stars to big-budget films featuring well-known stars. My favorite example is "Her Alibi," starring Tom Selleck. In this movie, a house is blown up as Selleck and his supermodel sidekick escape. Half an hour later, they return to the same house. The filmmakers forgot it had blown up earlier in the story. Ebert's reviews are full of these bits of information. It's a lot of fun to read. Hopefully, he will write a sequel --- but not just a collection of MORE reviews of really bad movies. He should take all those reviews and turn it into a lighthearted analysis of why Hollywood makes so many zero-star films.
|
