If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Is it too soon for a bad story about Roger Ebert??   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 23
    More: Followup, Roger Ebert, Siskel  
•       •       •

18773 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Apr 2013 at 12:23 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-04-11 09:54:30 PM
4 votes:
So, nobody actually read to the end yet eh?

Yes, this author goes on and on, but, the kicker at the end is, he's been trashing Ebert for 20 years over this pompous letter, and now that Ebert died he went back to look and it.... and realized it was Siskel who wrote it.

Which, duh... Siskel was always the pompous one.
2013-04-11 09:55:39 PM
3 votes:
So, really, it is a bad story about Siskel... and honestly, a worse story about the guy who wrote this article, since he turns out to be the biggest arse in the story, besides his horrible writing style.
2013-04-11 09:16:48 PM
3 votes:
That article was long-winded yet said absolutely nothing.

Stories like this aren't the reason journalism is dying, but it sure as hell ain't helping it stay alive.
2013-04-11 08:54:34 PM
3 votes:
It's too soon for a person trying to advance his career with a non-story about Ebert (of blessed memory)
2013-04-12 12:35:48 AM
2 votes:
The Post cropped a fantastic photo, WTF is wrong with people?

Here is the whole thing:


msnbcmedia.msn.com

/ I heart this photo THIS much!
2013-04-11 09:54:10 PM
2 votes:
The guy who wrote that nearly incomprehensible essay won TWO Pulitzers? Kill me.
2013-04-11 09:50:17 PM
2 votes:

Eddy Gurge: I guess reading the entire article is a lost art.


Here's the entire article.

Page 1 -- a heck of a lot of throat-clearing about how it's soooo icky to mock the dead, and the writer feels just awful that he's about to tell a story on Ebert

Page 2 -- author tells his story on Ebert, which is the very definition of a non-story and doesn't make Ebert look bad at all.  The end.
2013-04-11 09:31:26 PM
2 votes:
This is a bad story. I'm not sure it's about Roger Ebert. I'm not sure if it's about anything. It's pointlessly split into two pages and manages to say nothing between them. I'd criticize it further but I'll just end up copying lines from Ebert's review of North.

Not that there's nothing bad to say about Ebert, there's plenty on that front.
2013-04-11 08:47:31 PM
2 votes:
It's never too soon on Fark.com
2013-04-12 03:24:37 AM
1 votes:
DO YOU NOT BELIEVE IN THE VIRGIN MARY, NUMBNUTS? I WILL PT YOU UNTIL YOU DIE!

blog.moviepostershop.com
2013-04-12 03:07:40 AM
1 votes:
I can't tell people what to like, but that was an awesome article.

/that is all
//RIP Roger
2013-04-12 02:58:38 AM
1 votes:
Most people commenting here are ignorant. Gene Weingarten is a great writer, and the fact that you've never heard of him demonstrates your ignorance. It was not a newspaper article, nor a blog post. It was an update to his monthly Washington Post chat. You are idiots.
2013-04-12 02:39:56 AM
1 votes:
Once, late in his career, I saw Barry Bonds take such a monstrous swing at a ball that he stumbled backwards out of the batter's box and nearly fell on his ass. It was like a parody of a home run swing. If he'd actually made solid contact with the ball he probably would have hit it 500 feet, but instead he was up there weaving around like a drunken, 275-pound Little Leaguer.

I felt sorry for him, kind of like I feel sorry for this author. You can see the flop sweat all over this. It's one thing to aim at "funny yet touching" and miss; it's another thing to take point-blank aim at it with everything in your arsenal and yet repeatedly shoot yourself in the foot.
2013-04-12 02:15:34 AM
1 votes:
Two people who didn't come off looking bad from that story are Siskel and Ebert.
2013-04-12 01:28:00 AM
1 votes:

What_Would_Jimi_Do: i stopped caring what this guys were saying after 1987, when ebert was so harsh on full metal jacket.


Did you start hating Full Metal Jacket because Eyes Wide Shut sucked?

Ebert was a talented and popular guy whose work had high and low points like every other talented and popular guy.
2013-04-12 01:25:21 AM
1 votes:

JosephFinn: BTW, I'd like to note that Gene Weingarten is not the 2-bit person in this.  Gene Weingarten has two, really REALLY well-deserved Pulitzers for feature writing.  For instance, for  Fatal Distraction: Forgetting a Child in the Backseat of a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime?  (WARNING: this story will make you cry.  I don't care if you have no soul. You will still cry.)


Yes, and Herbert Hoover moved from unparalleled success to unparalleled success before becoming president.
2013-04-12 01:21:27 AM
1 votes:

What_Would_Jimi_Do: i stopped caring what this guys were saying after 1987, when ebert was so harsh on full metal jacket.


The movie's half a great basic training movie, half a mess of a Vietnam movie.  Get over it.
2013-04-12 01:08:01 AM
1 votes:

gingerjet: Ebert did a lot of fark'd up stuff early in his life and this is all somebody can come up with that's "bad"?

/love Ebert


http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2013/04/roger-ebert-me mo ries-bad-review-zweibel.html Here's an article written by a guy he had kneecapped, then gangraped and left for dead.
2013-04-12 01:01:57 AM
1 votes:

fusillade762: namatad: Chariset: Eddy Gurge: I guess reading the entire article is a lost art.

Here's the entire article.

Page 1 -- a heck of a lot of throat-clearing about how it's soooo icky to mock the dead, and the writer feels just awful that he's about to tell a story on Ebert

Page 2 -- author tells his story on Ebert, which is the very definition of a non-story and doesn't make Ebert look bad at all.  The end.

WHO?
some loser who won two pulitzers and felt the need to let us know?
YAWNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

He mentioned his two Pulitzers as an illustration about how you should not mention your Pulitzers.


So, he found a way to brag without coming across as a braggart?
2013-04-12 12:57:22 AM
1 votes:
After reading that article I feel like I fell for the most long-winded troll ever.
2013-04-12 12:46:36 AM
1 votes:
Wait a minute, let me get this straight:

You get a letter from a film critic, get pissed off because it basically accuses you of being a hack, and YOU NEVER ACTUALLY BOTHERED TO FIND OUT WHO WROTE IT?

That's some fine journalism there, Lou. No wonder the Tropic is so widely regarded as a bastion of truth and credibility the world over.
2013-04-11 11:11:39 PM
1 votes:

Triumph: The guy who wrote that nearly incomprehensible essay won TWO Pulitzers? Kill me.


i45.tinypic.com
2013-04-11 09:34:42 PM
1 votes:
I guess reading the entire article is a lost art.
 
Displayed 23 of 23 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report