Ebert & A Spot O’ Movies
I once read in some extended piece about Roger Ebert that writing never came with any sort of difficulty for him. Apparently, he’d come in to the office, sit down for a certain amount of time, and stand up with a finished column in hand. Part of this ability surely stems from the fact that he is truly someone who loves movies. From this great love has grown great knowledge of cinema — so what I really appreciate about his writing is his subtle incorporation of that knowledge. While our local yokel movie reviewer always hits you over the head with movies he has seen by name-dropping a slew of films, Ebert incorporates the experiences gained from other films, not necessarily their titles. Therefore, I am inclined to trust his review of the psychological thriller Awake. Ebert’s conclusion, I believe, speaks to his experience as a reviewer:
The movie opens under a cloud on a weekend all other mainstream movies have sidestepped, apparently because it’s our duty to commence Christmas shopping. But I felt what I felt, and there you have it.
Oh right right, the premise of the movie! I forgot to mention that: there’s a phenomenon called anesthetic awareness wherein conscious is gained but paralysis and numbness are maintained. I leave imagining this sort of experience as the domain of the movie or an exercise to the reader. Or both. I don’t know how much time you have this weekend.
The Namesake
Now here’s a film that I’ve been awaiting release on DVD since Mykala and I saw it this past March. Two things have changed: it finally was released on November 27 and Ebert got around to reviewing it. (Ebert was out with an extended and serious series of health complications, so he is going backwards through old movies to review them.) Now, I can convince my family to rent it. And, now I can read Ebert’s review.
Juno
Good lord, this one looks poised to tear up the theaters. (More on that in a minute.) So. Last I wrote about Michael Cera (well, Sagert mentioned him by name), I was guessing that Superbad was going to be pretty good. That movie turned out to be way way dirtier than I had thought, but in an unusually endearing, gentle manner. Fun to watch? Yes. Strange? Yes. Anyhow, this Cera fellow seems to have made some brilliant career moves by garnering attention on the big screen with Superbad, then skillfully leveraging himself out of a typecast frat pack-type role into a movie with more staying power. That movie is Juno, judging by Ebert’s preview review of it:
I don’t know when I’ve heard a standing ovation so long, loud and warm as the one at the Toronto International Film Festival after Jason Reitman’s “Juno,” which I predict will become quickly beloved when it opens at Christmas time, and wins a best actress nomination for its 20-year-old star, Ellen Page. It’s the kind of movie you almost insult by describing the plot…
High praise! So, as far as I can tell, you should go see this Juno movie when it comes to theaters near you. Plus, as a Minnesotan, I should mention that the screenplay is by a certain Diablo Cody, who lives in Minneapolis. However, her’s is unquestionably the weirdest biography I have ever read on IMDB. Seriously.
Comments
Nils
I’d be careful about so wholeheartedly trusting in one man’s opinion of films when deciding on which films are worthy of being viewed. For example, Ebert is about the only one giving Awake a positive review. Other critics even go as far as saying Awake may be the worst movie of 2007 (New York Daily News). That said, I guess I tend to take as fact the film reviews by The Onion A.V Club, but that’s because they wrote that The Fountain was one of the most underrated film of 2006 (which I completely agreed with).
Juno looks awesome, and there are several other limited release films out now that I still want to see: Atonement, The Savages, No Country for Old Men, and The Diving Bell and the Butterfly. So many films, so little time!
Sagert +1
Just basking in the glow is all. And you’ve all watched Arrested Development, right? I think I mentioned that last time. I wish I could get to a movie theater that showed something in English other than Resident Evil 3 (or Biohazard 3, as the locals call it…).
Dan McKeown
Rotten tomatoes. It has a way of balancing out a few bad reviews and a few of those over-the-top type to give a general rating. I have only found myself in disagreement two or three times. Unlike Chris Hewitt’s reviews. That man is a hack.
Nils +1
Dan, if you like Rotten Tomatoes, then you should check out Metacritic. Metacritic also pulls reviews from hundreds of separate sources but it distinguishes itself from Tomatoes by culling reviews from distinguished and prominent sources: trade journals (Premiere, Variety), periodicals (Rolling Stone, NME, Time, Newsweek), as well as a couple big newspaper critics (such as Ebert) whereas the vast majority of Tomatoes’ reviews come from obscure sources (<filmchicks.com>? <susangranger.com>? the Asheville NC newspaper?). I guess you could say that Metacritic is similar to the “Cream of the Crop” section of tomatoes as there are several sources that overlap between the two.
Mykala +1
I love Metacritic!
John
I’m an avid movie-goer. I use rottentomatoes almost exclusively unless it is something on the fence. Then the end all, say all… comes to Entertainment Weekly. They are incredibly harsh when it comes to movie reviews. I rarely see movies given an “A” rating. I think it just depends on how critical you want to get. I think Ebert loves movies so much that everything is a … “thumbs up.”
Nils
I love that you love Metacritic, Mykala. One heart for you!