Reminder Roger Ebert is a trash critic and here's why

This is what he said about Star wars fans, Superhero fans and video games.

>A lot of fans are basically fans of fandom itself. It's all about them. They have mastered the "Star Wars" or "Star Trek" universes or whatever, but their objects of veneration are useful mainly as a backdrop to their own devotion. Anyone who would camp out in a tent on the sidewalk for weeks in order to be first in line for a movie is more into camping on the sidewalk than movies.

>Extreme fandom may serve as a security blanket for the socially inept, who use its extreme structure as a substitute for social skills. If you are Luke Skywalker and she is Princess Leia, you already know what to say to each other, which is so much safer than having to ad-lib it. Your fannish obsession is your beard. If you know absolutely all the trivia about your cubbyhole of pop culture, it saves you from having to know anything about anything else. That's why it's excruciatingly boring to talk to such people: They're always asking you questions they know the answer to.

On superhero fans

>"Comic-Con nerds will have multiple orgasms," predicts critic David Edelstein inNew Yorkmagazine, confirming something I had vaguely suspected about them. If he is correct, it's time for desperately needed movies to re-educate nerds in the joys of sex

On video games
>Video games are not and will never be art

Attached: ebert_obit_add_P5.jpg (653x367, 38K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/ALFpRJKnK2U
youtu.be/Tle5ZnBjU7M
youtu.be/lHkpdtafTxw
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

He's been dead for 6 years. Let it go.

Everything hes saying is correct and you already know this

Cringe incel. Go post about how Captain Marvel is gonna flop while it breaks records.

Unironically based.

>Reminder Roger Ebert is a trash critic and here's why
Why did you follow this up with reasons for why he's great?

>REEEE WHY DOESN'T HE SUCK CORPORATE COCK LIKE I DO

Imagine unironically being angry that a film critic judges movies based on artistic merit rather than pandering to plebs.

>Reminder
I remembered now that I have wanted to listen to one of his commentaries. Gonna watch Casablanca and have a good time, thanks for the reminder friend.

youtu.be/ALFpRJKnK2U
Reminder that Siskel and Ebert knew who the real villains were.

pretty sure he reneged on the video game stuff.

based ebert speaking the truth

What about that is wrong in any way?

I thought he might be a trash critic too until you posted those quotes

Counterpoint: the last bit of his Human Centipede review
>I am required to award stars to movies I review. This time, I refuse to do it. The star rating system is unsuited to this film. Is the movie good? Is it bad? Does it matter? It is what it is and occupies a world where the stars don't shine

Spot on for fandom and nerdshit, dead wrong about video games.

Attached: april-4-2013-pulitzer-prize-winning-roger-ebert-who-is-best-known-D5MKHR.jpg (866x1390, 115K)

Wtf I love Roger Ebert now!!

DELET THIS

Based. Fanboys are a cancer, a plague, a pox.

Trash and critic are synonymous.

He gave my buddy's movie a positive review
He's also dead, so there's no reason to speak ill of him
So he gets a pass from me

>He gave my buddy's movie a positive review
Really? What movie?

Absolutely based. Cry more babyman retard

>>Video games are not and will never be art

lol he´s right, videogames are virtual toys

He said he isn't qualified to talk about games and also said that there might be some game in the future that qualifies as art.
There is a great GDC talk about this "An Apology for Roger Ebert".

I really recommend watching it for the topic of games (not) being art.

The only wrong statement there is the video games one and that is because the statement itself is fucking retarded and insulting to Graphic Designers. It's just his age getting to him because he can't adjust to newer forms of art. Everything else he said there is spot on, why so mad, OPenis?

Absolutely savage. Say what you want about him or his taste, but there are no critics like him nowadays--they're all pussies and conformist faggots.

>they're all pussies and conformist faggots
That's literally Ebert who never took a strong or radical stance on anything

Wether games are art or not has absolutely nothing to do with graphic designers

>took a strong or radical stance on anything
Of course he did. Even the OP quotes his famous "video games are art" and there were plenty of times when he went completely against the critics and public trend.

Who?

*aren't art

Attached: v.edditors.jpg (480x482, 56K)

I've been watching his videos recently
Siskel and Ebert are having good chemistry
youtu.be/ALFpRJKnK2U
youtu.be/Tle5ZnBjU7M

youtu.be/lHkpdtafTxw
They had better chemistry than RLM ever did.

Attached: 10494851_10152352134153375_977231641584576510_n.jpg (443x604, 35K)

>They had better chemistry than RLM ever did.

they were on cable tv, it was required to have a level of professionalism back then

>"Comic-Con nerds will have multiple orgasms," predicts critic David Edelstein inNew Yorkmagazine, confirming something I had vaguely suspected about them. If he is correct, it's time for desperately needed movies to re-educate nerds in the joys of sex

I do not even understand what he is saying here.

He's absolutely right on all accounts.

Yeah because you're a virgin

How is that difficult to understand?

>That week before Roger passed away, I would see him and he would talk about having visited this other place. I thought he was hallucinating. I thought they were giving him too much medication. But the day before he passed away, he wrote me a note:
>"this is all an elaborate hoax"

>he was talking about this world, this place. He said it was all an illusion. I thought he was confused. But he was not confused.

how do I break out of the simulation?

Attached: fds.gif (320x240, 1.65M)

He savaged multiple genre movies in the 80s that are now regarded as gold standard classics. You could have brought up any of those but you went the bait route instead. I suppose Roger would commend you for playing to your audience. It is pretty funny how poorly his views on "fandom" have aged tho.

was he redpilled, and, dare I say it, /our guy/?

He was based and cancerpilled

>funny how poorly his views on "fandom" have aged

how so

If they're having orgasms, clearly they understand the joys of sex already?

He was a trash critic but that's absolutely not the reason why, he was actually correct there, you dumb man child. If you want to know why he sucked, look up Armond's opinion on him.

Roger Ebert on Emma Watson in Chamber of Secrets

>In the new movie, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe, a little taller and deeper-voiced) returns with his friends Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson, in the early stages of babehood).

nah, i am thinking he is based

Attached: 8bc13284ccf5778d540e3ff1fa059d51.jpg (449x600, 54K)

based and deadpilled

that's right, fuck the prots
orthodox and proud

Holy fucking based. He also forshadowed marvel quip cancer. From his Ironman review.

>It's prudent, I think, that Favreau positions the rest of the characters in a more serious vein. The supporting cast wisely does not try to one-up him. Gwyneth Paltrow plays Pepper Potts as a woman who is seriously concerned that this goofball will kill himself. Jeff Bridges makes Obadiah Stane one of the great superhero villains by seeming plausibly concerned about the stock price. Terrence Howard, as Col. Rhodes, is at every moment a conventional straight arrow. What a horror show it would have been if they were all tuned to Tony Stark's sardonic wave length. We'd be back in the world of "Swingers" (1996) which was written by Favreau.

He is right. Star Wars and capeshit are both trash. Both fandoms are retarded and autistic.

Literally who?

is this photoshopped or a real picture?

What are you babbling about, you brain dead freak?

The Revenant.

Why's he wrong?
Only a manchild would be insulted at what he said.

He was dead before The Revenant.

>second-rate movie critics shoehorns armchair psychology into his work

yikes

A good example

could they not at least have taped his lips shut so he doesn't have this extremely disconcerting floppy boneless jaw dangling around

>video games are art because they have visuals
yikes

That post reeks of manchild trying to sound smart to deflect criticism towards his escapism haven.

>is
>was

More like a based critic

He's absolutely right.
GET A LIFE.

Attached: skep-rock.jpg (640x360, 60K)

So anyone who expresses an opinion you disagree with is a 'trash critic?"

I'm going to out on a limb here, and assume that when the facts don't fit your narrative you shout "FAKE NEWS!"

wtf i like ebert now

cool, i was in the mood for something like this. thanks

shut the fuck up and just fap

Seething tranny detected

This

What the fuck is going on with that jaw

Ebert was a fat faggot but he did write Beyond the Valley of the Dolls which is a masterpiece!!!FACT!!!

Should have put a plate in there and used it as an ashtray!!!FACT!!!

It was removed because of cancer.

>the person who designs McDonald’s monopoly pieces creates art since it’s visual

based
cringe

he was right
if you care this much about capeshit you are an insufferable faggot who should be put into a camp for fat fucking retards who need to be executed

But he's spot on right about all these things you stupid capeshitter

Based Ebert.

What exactly among those things is supposed to make him a trash critic?

>Video games are not and will never be art
opinion discarded

>Video games are not and will never be art
factually wrong, unless he doesn't consider board games a piece of art or any other games. they all have artistic value and combine many existing artforms into a new one.

>>Video games are not and will never be art
Y-you'll eat those words.....Sony is BASED FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Attached: I smell stinky tonight kiss me.jpg (660x352, 30K)