The goal of /r/Movies is to provide an inclusive place for discussions and news about films with major releases. Submissions should be for the purpose of informing or initiating a discussion, not just to entertain readers. Read our extensive list of rules for more information on other types of posts like fan-art and self-promotion, or message the moderators if you have any questions.
Media
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
"It's a heartwarming story, but it's just not believable, which is why I give E.T. one and a half stars." -Perd Hapley - Lights, Camera, Perd
I don't know what you mean, but it had the cadence of a joke.
And I have just realized I am not holding my microphone
What a hilarious image—a foot in a mouth!
More like Turd Crapley
Honestly one of the times I laughed the absolute hardest at a Parks & Rec joke!! Obviously it's a stupid joke in a show full of clever wit and great writing, but that's what made it so amazing.
It's so brilliant because that is precisely the sort of insult you'd expect some dork to use as a dunk irl.
I have also misplaced my judge hammer.
*GAVEL
Reminds me of the funniest thing my uncle has ever said to me. This is after we left Pirates of the Caribbean in the theaters.
"The pirates turn into ghosts! Why can't we just have a realistic movie that happens in the real world like The Terminator."
I'm a bigger fan of the segment final word with perd, personally.
perdvert
“Okay, but who hasn’t had gay thoughts?!?”
Hahahaha
Even Siskel and Ebert can be wrong sometimes.
In fact, "awe and majesty" is a pretty good way to describe the John Williams score.
Ebert went back and re-examined his initial review of La dolce vita. Admitted he was too young to appreciate the films perspective.
TheyEbert scored the abomination Pearl Harbour higher than Tora Tora Tora, one of the most realistic and accurate war films ever made.Ironically when I think of Ebert, his review absolutely eviscerating Pearl Harbour is one of the first things that comes to mind
“I may one day be skinny, but he will have always made The Brown Bunny.”
That's a classic, as well. Another one I always remember is the end of the North review.
Except in a weird twist of fate he re-cut brown bunny and Ebert changed his review to be more positive. Kind of like one day becoming skinny
It’s so accurate it becomes a documentary though
That score with the helicopter touch down, waterfall in background followed quickly by its finish in herbivore valley is the definition of awe in movies.
Right? Kids born after the 90s have no idea how mind blowing cool the movie was. Special effects for the movie made it feel real. NOTHING looked as real before it. It is easily in the top 5 best movies to push special effects ever made.
Honestly, I can’t think of anything that has looked as real since then. There were minor digital alterations, but it primarily used real effects. Which is why it looks so goddamn good even by today’s standards.
My personal headcanon is that Williams was scoring John Hammond's feelings towards the park: something grand, exciting and FRESH, full of bright and noble adventure. A chance to prove himself to the world and bring true majesty and greatness to it.
Then Williams also scores the dark, brooding true nature of the park: the carnivore dinosaurs are merciless, heartless beasts that don't like being caged in, animals that just want to survive, and they will eat you if that's what it takes.
But he also scores the gentle giants and the BEAUTY of nature found in the dinosaurs, too: and this is where the herbivore themes truly shine.
this was my thought- even if you watch a lot of movies, that film broke so much ground and had so many epic moments that I can't imagine not feeling those sensations!
I was 10 when it came out and we saw it opening night. To this day it’s one of my favorite childhood moments. I think it was the first film I’d ever seen where there was a line around the block to get in.
I’ve probably seen it over 25 times in my life and that sequence will still give me goosebumps. And it didn’t used to but now that I’m older the part where Grant starts quietly crying in awe makes me cry a little too. Such a strong feeling of validation in that moment, you feel happy for him.
Literally got goosebumps when I rewatched this a month ago. The movie still holds up. It's one of the greatest films ever.
Holy fucking shit,
It's a Dinosaur!
Jesus Christ – What the fuck!?
Oh my fucking god,
fucking Dinosaurs!
Holy shit – what the fuuuuuuuuuuckkkkkkkk!!!!~!
🎶
They use the theme in Jurassic World when they show off the boring ass theme park and we sang
It's a monorail
No one gives a shit
Wait is this an existing meme or did you make the greatest song in world history?
EDIT: oh
It is the greatest song in world history though
Ebert gave Clue a bad score because he was annoyed that it had three different endings and he had to go watch the movie three times in order to see them lol
If I was a reviewer, that would be annoying. Great movie though
You can read his review here:
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/clue-1985
He is really frustrated by the three ending gimmick. The majority of us saw it on VHS or television where all the three endings are played back to back with title cards in between them. With the final one being revealed as the true ending.
He says he was able to see all three endings. Not sure if he had to sit through the movie three different times or if he got a special cut or he watched it once and then they queued up the other two for when their endings showed up. The title cards in between the endings didn't exist for the theater release and were made specifically for the VHS release.
That would be extremely frustrating to be honest. He also says he wants to suggest ending A but then the studio cant be certain that listings for ending A would be the ending that he saw.
It probably felt like flames on the side of his face.
I mean I agree. Clue didn't become popular with audiences until you could buy the DVD with all 3 endings on it.
It was a neat experiment but in terms of ticket sales it didn't work, and studios never did that again in any major way.
All three endings were shown in the broadcast and home media releases before DVD was a thing. DVD was actually the first time since the theatrical run where you could opt to watch it with a single ending rather than all three.
These kids think DVD was the first thing you could watch at home. I'm 99% certain the first place I ever watched the movie was rented - on a Beta tape.
You're right. Now that I think about it, I probably saw the VHS version in 1999 or 2000 first.
The point is, most people don't want to roll the dice and get one, random ending.
It became popular well before dvd. My friends and I quoted this in junior high in the mid 90s and the school put on a version of it in our theater department.
Ikr? When they first arrive at the park, with the slow score building up as they show their reactions and slowly reveal what is being seen. That is the exact reaction I had. I was in awe. It honestly felt like they had actually brought them to life.
The problem, I think, is that "awe and majesty" were just table stakes - everyone walked into the theater knowing they were gonna see dinosaurs on screen, and they expected to be awed by their majesty. And the movie delivered! It met that expectation, but now you're not feeling awed because it wasn't even more awe inspiring than you could have ever imagined.
I definitely don't agree with that criticism in any dimension.
The funny thing is that the dinosaurs were so well done that they hold up to this day. The t-rex scene still gets me every time.
They were wrong A LOT of the time. They were popular because their arguments were entertaining and they were likeable
I never watched them for their final thumbing. Their thumbs up/thumbs down by itself was almost always useless to me. But their discussion almost always gave me a feel for whether I would enjoy the movie. Even when they were describing something about the movie they didn't like, they'd be fair enough in their description for me to realize, "Oh, this is just a perspective thing, I'd like that thing they hate."
Ebert got a lot of shit in the 2000s for giving pretty much every Fast and Furious movie a thumbs-up; before the 2010s came and everyone decided they loved the whole series.
Yeah, he wasn't afraid to say, "Hey, this isn't cinema, but it sure is fun."
Kind of like how a a trusted critics view is more valuable than the tomatometer?
Critics aren't "wrong" they're expressing their opinion.
Good critics have a consistent opinion that you can understand and learn from, even if your opinion is likely to differ. Back when he was still writing my family would often say "Roger Ebert thought this action movie was boring so we'll probably enjoy it as a fun popcorn movie."
Of course you get downvoted for this. People on Reddit hate the idea of subjectivity. Especially with film.
Ebert could be pretty based at times with his opinions. Siskel was a square though
Ebert judged the film for what it was trying to BE. If it was a good popcorn film, he would say so. Not every movie is going to be a Kubrick classic, nor is every movie trying to be. Siskel took a more art-school approach. Neither is a wrong way to approach the topic, and the clash of the two made it interesting.
And yes, Siskel & Ebert were great because of the different personalities. You got to know them as people (sort of) and could very often disagree with either or both of them. But they were very entertaining, and brought the idea of mainstream movie criticism into the behemoth it is today.
Prior to these two on TV, film criticism was mostly a really rarified and semi-obscure part of pop culture.
I grew up with these guys as I was born and raised in Chicago, and their show started as a low-budget local PBS channel thing. I remember the early days of their show, when Siskel had his 70's mustache.
Yep this is why Ebert gave Rocketman with Harland Williams 3 out of 4 stars. It aims to be a silly space movie and greatly succeeds at it.
The only reason JW didn’t get an Oscar nomination for JP was because he beat himself in the same year with Schindlers List.
Me and my family were discussing John Williams scores recently and my brother said the song (you know the one) perfectly captures the feeling of wonder.
Ebert also gave Crash 4 stars and praised its authenticity.
they said there was awe and majesty in the first act but then it descended into a monster picture.
And he is not wrong for that, but I think in hindsight it is a bit harsh. For me, the transition or contrast ended up being pretty effective and I recently saw it in theatres
They were wrong often, maybe more often than not. The controversy was their brand.
I think the Jurassic Theme is probably the best theme ever written. Although X-Men animated (tv) and Indiana Jones and battle of the heroes (revenge of the sith) and Howard shore's middle earth main theme are all up there it's so hard to decide.
For main theme? Williams's Superman score would like a word.
My first thought, too. Williams’ Superman score is absolutely iconic.
YESSSS!!!! Finally someone who appreciates it as much as me!!! Thank you!
The Superman theme sounds like an updated version of Thus Spake Zarathustra and that deepens my appreciation for it even more.
I'd throw the gladiator theme in there too the score really elevated that movie.
When I bitch about the current state of film I often use Jurrasic Park as an example of "awe, majesty, and movie magic" that we've lost over the years.
I
They had a weird thing against Spielberg for a while there. Remember they shat all over "Hook" too. Which, in some academical sense, sure, maybe it wasn't the greatest story ever told. But cmon, it was still an epic masterpiece.
So wrong on this one. Absurdly even
Not really. Siskel and Ebert are considered greats because they were pretty accurate. And they were also in general more positive than the rest of the critics in their day. Even this one they had their complaints still gave it 3 out of 4. Thier Armageddon review is pretty similar. Point out all it flaws as a formulaic movie and ends with if your the type to only see one movie a year or want to see spectacle then go see it right now this is the one. They were very aware that they see more movies than most and routinely acknowledged it. Ebert loved horror movies, he hated gore for gores sake but a good horror movie he’d rate higher compared to most others. He had a Halloween list he’d do with Tim Burton frequently. Sewered Burtons films all the time.
Ebert was also just a really good writer. His reviews were worth reading even if they didn't fit the consensus.
I consumed them he was a big influence on me enjoying movie spectacles themes and hard work put into their imagery/stunts. Or at least helped me put it into words.
Pauline Kael is a great critic.
I think they were "greats" because they were relatable, they could communicate their likes and dislikes. People enjoyed listening to them chat, quibble, debate, ect. I doubt they were much accurate than any other critic who was educated on good film making, pacing, performances, ect. And they had good chemistry together, Ebert being the overweight, down to earth guy and Siskel being the more fastidious, intellectual, Ivy league guy. They were a little like John Candy and Steve Martin in Planes, Trains, and Automobiles.
they frequently had terrible opinions. especially Ebert.
I think the score carries it more than we realize.
I remember when they gave two thumbs up to the infamous comedy Booty Call, which was getting poor reviews elsewhere and was already a punchline for its title.
Their reason for the rating? “It’s said that the only judge of a comedy should be if it made you laugh or not. And dammit, we laughed our asses off.”
The lukewarm 3 out of 4 stars
They weren't blown away or too impressed but they acknowledge it's well-made in every way. This is called objectivity. Not liking something all that much but accepting it's still good.
Such a foreign concept in the modern age, unfortunately.
I accept the modern age, but I don't like it.
I reject the modern age, but I still exist in it.