MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Ebert’s Life On The Televised Aisle Flashes Before Our Eyes In New Show Titles

Be Sociable, Share!

10 Responses to “Ebert’s Life On The Televised Aisle Flashes Before Our Eyes In New Show Titles”

  1. manliano says:

    Love this man.

  2. Don Murphy says:

    Because gosh darn it CRITICS MATTER!

  3. NickF says:

    That’s high quality production for a PBS intro.

  4. Marc says:

    I love this guy, too, and I’m sure Lemire and her co-host are very grateful for the opportunity, but…talk about a shadow to stand in, which this opener only underlines. Will these credits (and “Oh, by the way…”) even mention the new team?

  5. BrandonS says:

    And this man loves The Third Man.

    (Me, too.)

  6. actionman says:

    so this will air on PBS? does anyone know if Connecticut PBS picked it up? Slick intro — LOVE the Ebert.

  7. Ray Pride says:

    Ebert offers a PDF of the stations carrying the show here.

  8. Hopscotch says:

    The Music is an homage to the score to “The Third Man.” One of Ebert’s all time favorite films.

  9. cadavra says:

    And it could also refer to himself, since he will be the (mostly) unseen presence hovering over the show, not unlike the namesake.

  10. movieman says:

    Does anyone know whether Roger is paying for this travesty out of his own pocket?
    For the life of me, I can’t understand why Rog is so determined to completely eviscerate his noble “Siskel and Ebert” legacy with this destined-for-failure trainwreck-in-waiting with “Barbie Doll ‘Movie Critic'” Lemire and the adolescent Russian emigre (hey, does anyone even know whether he speaks English? does it even matter?) You would’ve thought that foisting the smug, callow wannabe Richard Roeper on the movie-loving public was enough punishment for one superstar critic to inflict on his once proud heritage.
    Sad, sad, sad. I wish it a quick and (relatively) painless death–in Barbie Doll’s case, a long and excruciating one ’cause, gosh darn, she deserves it.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon