Was he pleb or patrician?
About the same as you
Just some critic that had his own taste. Just like everyone else.
Would he have liked the new Ghostbusters?
>Raverage Plebert
>patrician
lmao
>>72018525
a disgusting pleb popular thanks to a TV show, that's it.
He's probably seen ten times as many kinos as anyone on this board.
The real question is, who was superior?
>>72018525
Worse. A flip flopper piece of shit. Whenever a good movie came out that the public loved he had to go and revise his "reviews" because he had no actual taste. That's respectable, having no taste. But flip flopping your opinion is disgusting. Every flip flopper deserves to die, Trump is next on the list.
>>72018931
>Trump is a bigger flip flopper than Hillary
Don't go there, girlfriend.
>>72018889
Siskel. Ebert was pretty intellectualy dishonest and too often resorted to "it's good because it's good, I liked it because I liked it".
>dislikes Home Alone 1 and 2
>but likes 3
TOP
O
P
PLEB
L
E
B
>>72018525
If you had read many of his reviews you might conclude that he contemplated movies in great detail from various vantage points including his own summation .
>>72019149
That is completely inaccurate.
>>72019047
Shut up trump supporter faggot
>>72018595
Honestly I believe Ebert would have strongly disliked the new Ghostbusters while dissecting it piece by piece.
>>72018525
>>72018525
He gave both Batman and Batman & Robin the same amount of stars. I think it kinda discards his opinion on everything, no?
>>72019953
Two, and a half stars seems fitting for both.
He gave Gamera the Brave, The Mighty Peking Man, The Super Inframan and The Relic good reviews. I always liked that he had a sense of fun and humor. He lightened up a lot in the 90s, which made me like him more.
>>72018525
he's inbetween, bourgeois or middle-brow or whatever you want to call it
his main flaw being his ridiculous sensitivity to anything trashy or lewd, anytime characters have sex on screen they better be sweethearts in love or he spergs out
>>72018525
Film critics are by definition pleb-tier. They are so devoid of talent that their only contribution to society is watching movies and telling us what we're supposed to think and expect. The only thing a film critic has in excess, besides an aversion to real work, is luck. But this luck is double-edged. It may have allowed him to land a job cushier than a mattress tester, but it has also given him a career that amounts to a vapid and hollow existence, with very little to take pride in. I bet in Mr. Ebert's final jaw-less moments, he wished he had done more with his life than watch pictures flicker by at 24 fps.
>>72019149
Siskel absolutely got Silence of the Lambs wrong.
He sucks actually.
>>72020076
he wrote one of the most entertaining movie ever though
>>72019953
Only manchildren see a difference between all these capshit movies. You probably watch Jeremy Jewns, Peeved Pedro and snapped neck don't you?
>I am happy to say it brings back an element sadly missing in recent movies, gratuitous nudity. Sexy women would "happen" to be topless in the 1970s movies for no better reason than that everyone agreed, including themselves, that their breasts were a genuine pleasure to regard -- the most beautiful naturally occurring shapes in nature, I believe. Now we see breasts only in serious films, for expressing reasons. There's been such a comeback for the strategically positioned bed sheet, you'd think we were back in the 1950s.
>>72019953
>>72020004
Yeah, they're about on the same level.
>>72020142
>tried to watch it
>the first 20 minutes are the most boring thing I have ever seen
>give up
I'll try again but fuck me I can't get past it.
>>72020272
BASED
A
S
E
D
>>72019047
Let me tickle under your chin, cutie pie
