The Great Movies

I confess that I’m not a big fan of movies or other forms of visual art. It’s not that I really have anything against the medium, it just seems that my time is so limited, that I rarely want to devote several hours of my frugal day to sit still and stare at a moving picture. I only mention this in my review because if someone such as myself can really enjoy this type of book, I would think that those who actually love going to the movies would find such a companion essential.Roger Ebert first became a household name when he teamed up with fellow Chicago film critic Gene Siskel, and the two hosted the weekly syndicated show “Siskel and Ebert”. On the show, they would review three or four movies per week and gave each movie a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down”. The show was so successful that there were many copycat shows that surfaced during the 80s and 90s, but Siskel and Ebert were the originals, and the best. Nothing was better advertising for a new movie that could bolster the moniker “Two Thumbs Up!” as part of its advertising.As time went on, the astute learned that being a film critic wasn’t necessary a job that “anyone could do”. In the late 80s, Roger Ebert started releasing annual books of his reviews, and one learned that the man was very insightful when it came to distinguishing great works of art from cookie-cutter exploitation. Then, the internet came along, and one could basically read every Roger Ebert review ever printed by going to his website. His insights and commentary were indispensable to all and he quickly became the most well-known film critic. I was one who, every time I would watch a movie, jump on to his website and read about what he had to say about the film that I had just watched. Most of the time I agreed with him, and he always had the ability to look much deeper and find things and see things that I could not.That seems to be what prompted him to do his “Great Movies” series. Unlike what many people might think, this book (and the two others that followed) aren’t actually reviews of these movies, but rather essays where Ebert goes a bit further and explains in more depth why these movies are, in fact, great. It should be pointed out that when Ebert actually reviewed a movie, he tried very hard not to include spoilers. When he writes these essays, however, he assumes that his audience has already viewed the films, or if they haven’t, would rather study such works and not really care that he often, gives away much of the plot.This book of movies covers a lot of ground, and I’m sure Ebert had to be a bit selective when choosing what films to feature. Most of the obvious ones are here (Star Wars, Citizen Cane, Gone with the Wind), but he also includes some very bizarre choices that 99% of movie goers not only haven’t seen, not only haven’t heard of, but probably couldn’t view such a film because of its limited availability. A lot of old, silent, foreign, and/or documentaries are featured here as well the more familiar. Again, though, this really isn’t a drawback. I imagine someone who seriously loves films would take a significant amount of time to attempt to track down all of the works that are featured here and purchase them to study for themselves. Fortunately, things such as the internet makes such an arduous task a bit more manageable.I really can’t think of anyone better than Roger Ebert to produce such a work as this, yet I must confess that the man’s devotion to the cinema could be rather frightening at times. As I read this book, I often thought “Did this man ever do anything in his life other than watch movies?” He would state things such as “I manage to go back and watch this film a couple of times per year”, or “I often study this movie with a film class, and we do a shot by shot analysis.” Sheesh. I really can’t imagine anyone devoting that much time to anything, let alone watching movies, but this was what made the man so respected in the industry.As I mentioned, if one is a bit lazy, one doesn’t really need to purchase this book, as he includes his “great movies” series on his internet site. Since many people can now access the internet via a tablet or a Kindle, one could definitely take such an advantage. It was sort of nice, however, to have all of these narratives in one place, which was why I chose to purchase it (and the fact that Amazon was having a sale).I’m sure I’ll not be the first person that will say this as I conclude this review, and it does sound a bit hokey, but here it goes: This book is a definite Thumbs Up. Thumbs way Up.

There are two things to look at here. His choices and how he writes about them.More than a few of these films are simply, boring things he loves and he couldn't convince me are tolerable.However, what he says about the majority of these films is wonderful.His insight about the parallel between the protagonists and story of "The Searchers" and "Taxi Driver" is brilliant and, as far as I know, original. His chapter about watching "E.T" with two grandchildren is moving and illuminating.His appreciation of the truly great films is so visible that one can forgive him praising Bunuel and other purveyors of emptiness.

Subscribed to Criterion Channel, needed a guide to locate desired movies, ordered all four of Ebert's books, is just the thing.

Short essays that explain why certain fils are deemed essential. A must-read for fans of cinema who want to try new genres.

Though I haven't yet read all 100 of Ebert's essays on the greatest movies, I've enjoyed each so far and have added quite a few movies to my queue for future watching. There are so many famous and predictable inclusions in the book, but some oldies-but-goodies that you probably haven't heard of. Ebert is so articulate about what appeals in each of these films that you will find yourself wanting to re watch your favorites and check out the rest. He was truly a great and very skillful reviewer of movies and had a great repository of knowledge about the entire industry. Whether you pick up the book and read cover to cover or jump around to the essays on your favorite films, you will be very entertained with Ebert's writing style.

These are short essays on 100 of Roger's favorite movies. Even though Roger has studied many of these films shot by shot there is no thorough deconstruction of these movies. Most are 3 page essays with synopsis and commentary on themes. But, serious film students can learn from this as well as the layman.This IS a great book by a movie critic who I agree with less than half the time. Lately, I think Roger has seen one too many movies. He's not as discerning as he once was and he's far too forgiving of a lot of the mediocrity that's foisted on us by the Hollywood Money Machine. I disagree with his recent assessment of movies such as SPIDERMAN 2, KILL BILL VOL. 2, SIN CITY, THE DEVIL'S REJECTS, and THE CLEARING, which was the worst movie of 2004. But, if you think he's just a Pop Culture movie critic, think again. He's won a Pulitzer prize, and his commentary for the CITIZEN KANE DVD is a must hear for any serious student of filmmaking.I DO agree with his inclusion of almost all of the classics listed here. Some of his favorites are also mine. On DVD, I own 42 of the 100 films he essays here. Some I call "movies," some are "films." His taste mirrors my own in many ways. Especially his love of black and white films. And his love for Oliver Stone's masterpiece, JFK. But, for different reasons than Roger states here. Roger has changed his opinion about this film after his initial review because he received an undeserved tongue lashing from Walter Cronkite, who apparently knows nothing about the facts of the Kennedy assassination, and was probably mad because his 1963 broadcast likeness announcing Kennedy's death was used in the film without his knowledge. Now Roger says he loves it for it's "mood." Shame on you, Roger, for revising your original statements concerning this great film. I love JFK for the sheer force of it's propaganda, for being more right than wrong(Stone did his homework on this film), and for Kostner's performance(I cry every time he gives his final court room summation. So did Kostner when his was reciting the words. It's Garrison's actual speech from the trial, which Roger fails to mention here). It's also a marvel of film Editing and changing film stocks; which IS touched on by Roger. It's easily the most important film of the 20th Century. Because of it's controversy, Congress passed the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, mandating that records be opened to researchers from the National Archives(what's was left of them, anyway. Oswald's files were completely destroyed). But, in recent years Roger has backpedaled on it's importance.Great old movies that might go unnoticed by modern MOVIE GOERS are treated as essential viewing for FILM LOVERS(the distinction is mine, not Roger's). A lot of people have seen SEVEN SAMURAI, but how many people have seen Kurosawa's emotional masterpiece IKIRU? Hopefully many more now that Roger has written an essay on it. Other great inclusions are: THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, Chaplin's CITY LIGHTS, Cocteau's BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, DETOUR(a rotten low-budget B FILM NOIR), Buster Keaton's THE GENERAL, A HARD DAY'S NIGHT(I'm an Elvis man myself, so I would have thrown in JAILHOUSE ROCK too), LE SAMOURAI, Charles Laughton's only directorial outing, THE NIGHT OF THE HUNTER with the great Robert Mitchum, Disney's PINOCCHIO, Astaire & Rogers SWING TIME, Peckinpah's THE WILD BUNCH, Wim Wender's marvelous art film WINGS OF DESIRE, Ozu's FLOATING WEEDS(personally I would have gone with his tearjerker TOKYO STORY). And the best inclusion is THE SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS, with it's odd and bombastic dialogue. It's one the most elegant pieces of FILM NOIR about bottom feeding rats ever written. And Roger knows it. Bravo!!My only hope is that Roger will reassess Peter Jackson's LORD OF THE RINGS TRILOGY. This film is GONE WITH THE WIND for my generation. It's a masterpiece that I call the SISTINE CHAPEL OF CINEMA. To see this film and not be completely moved by it, is like going to Vatican City, seeing the chapel, and saying, "Eh, it was alright." It's belongs in one of his books.I just ordered THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC from Criterion after reading his essay on it. I've never seen it and Roger has me intrigued.This book of essays deserves a WHOPPING 5 STARs. But, the reason I'm giving this one STAR is because the PAPERBACK fell apart in my hands after getting half way through it. A reviewer below had the same problem. THE BINDING IS TERRIBLE.DEFINITELY GO WITH THE HARDBOUND VERSION.ENJOY.

A wonderful collection of essays by the late, great Roger Ebert. He’ll have you going back to re-watch umpteen films, whilst also tipping you off about the attractions of several you haven’t seen. Highly recommended.

like all great books of this sort Roger Ebert's essays send you back to movies you have seen in the past and search out ones you may have missed out on. Even when you may not always agree with some of his selections you can still enjoy reading his views on them. Like Pauline Kael and David Thomson he is also a very good writer so even reading about movies you have not seen is never a task.Along with Thomson's 'Have You Seen' this is a great book to pick up and flick through at any time.As Mr Ebert sadly passed away in 2013 we will have no new volumes to look forward to but he has left behind many volumes of movie reviews and we can be thankful for that.

Compulsively readable. Very balanced and erudite reviews. A little more edge would have been welcome but overall Ebert's love of film is infectious and admirable.

St Roger is the doyen of reviewers, deeply informed, literate, humane. His passing is deeply mourned, but at least we have his writings - and the review site still continues his tradition.

Wonderful to read all about classic movies, written by someone who truly loves them. An excellent read, an author greatly missed.