Customer Reviews

Roger Ebert's Movie Yearbook 2006

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

A Christmas tradition, I read this book all year long and reference the earlier books often as well when doing research, picking dvds, arguing with fellow movie buffs and often just for intelligent writing and interviews. He os not the only critic that I read, but he is the one that I read religiously and after all these years I am sure of what he means when he writes a review. I am fond of the EW crtics but they are often at odds, abd I can count on Mr Ebert's books to steer me in the direction that best suits my taste. This book is, as always, invaluable and a great read. I don't findthat he has mellowed with age as much as his tastes have grown and matured as he has, and we all refect the changes in our lives. Roger is not the same person perhaps as he was 10 years ago, but then neither am I. Love this book, and love his earlier yearbooks as well!

I anxiously await the release of this book on an annual basis. I feel that in some instances Ebert can be too generous with his stars as opposed to the ones in other movie books (Leonard Maltin anyone ?) but one can not blame the man for liking his work a little too much. For some reason, I tend to enjoy his "zero stars" reviews the best but I doubt if I'm the only one.
The essays, movie answer man column and glossary entries are a most for movie buffs and they alone are worth the price of this book.

If you're a moviegoer, you NEED Roger Ebert's Movie Yearbook. The 2006 edition covers films from January 2003 to June 2005 (almost 700 reviews according to the book). But it's not just movie reviews, it also has interviews with various movie stars and directors.

What I really love about this book is the style of writing Ebert uses. His style of criticism is fantastic which is why I admire his work. Not only is he a fantastic critic but he is an inspiration to writers all over the United States.

I did enjoy this book. I could not put it down, literally. If I closed the book and put it back on the shelf, two seconds later, I was looking up another film. I highly recommend it to EVERYONE -- especially moviegoers. I don't see how they can live without owning this book. "Roger Ebert's Movie Yearbook 2006" gets a well-deserved 5 stars.

I really enjoyed reading Roger's reviews. He's not just a movie goer; he's also obviously a reader. If the movie has been based on a book, you can bet he's read the book. His reviews have prompted me to seek out movies I might not otherwise watch.

Roger Ebert, who has been writing print-reviews at the Chicago Sun-Times since 1967, has revitalized and changed the way we look at cinema.

When Gene Siskel and he took a job reviewing movies on a nationally syndicated TV show, they trademarked the phrase "Two Thumbs Up!"

I'm sure there are people who don't know what reviews will be in this edition, but it ought to contain (based on the timeline on the back of the book) not just **** (4 star) reviews like THE AVIATOR, MILLION DOLLAR BABY (Ebert's pick for Best Film of 2004-which won the Oscar for that honor), HOTEL RWANDA, SIDEWAYS and VERA DRAKE, but also good movies like THE BROWN BUNNY (Vincent Gallo's controversial vanity fest that Ebert initially panned at the Cannes Film Festival in 2003!), and OCEAN'S TWELVE, as well as mediocre films like I ROBOT and SUSPECT ZERO, and terrible films like SLEEPOVER and THE VILLAGE. These should all be new to the annual movie yearbook.

These, and other films from January 2003-June 2005 will appear, including such gems as BRIGHT YOUNG THINGS, CELLULAR, MILLIONS, ME AND YOU AND EVERYONE WE KNOW, PALINDROMES, MELINDA & MELINDA, CRASH (my favorite film of this year), BAD EDUCATION, ALEXANDER (Ebert gave **), and others.

NOTE: The frustrating thing about Ebert's Movie Yearbook is that it somehow is missing something. If you look at the index, it has all the films published in the series of yearbooks (that's true). However, it DOES NOT have the reviews and commentary, best film lists and so on from every year since 1967. When Ebert finally switched his webpage to [...], I was happy to see that you could finally access all of his writings going back to his beginning as a film critic.

Now if only we could get his print reviews back onto the printed page. I suggest he release a series of Decade by Decade Film Review Guides, which will have all of his writings from 1967.

Suggested titles:

THE 60s: 1967-1969 -- would contain every review, interview, best film list, festival report, etc. from his beginnings as a film critic to the end of that decade, including PERSONA, EASY RIDER, COOL HAND LUKE, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY and many others.

THE 70s: 1970-1979 -- would contain every review, interview, best film list, festival report, etc. from the beginning of the decade to the end, including such gems as MASH, MCCABE & MRS. MILLER, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE (**!), NASHVILLE, TAXI DRIVER, MEAN STREETS, ALICE DOESN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE, INTERIORS, APOCALYPSE NOW, etc.

THE 80s: 1980-1989 -- would contain every review, interview, best film list, festival report, etc. from the beginning of the greed era to the ushering in of special effects pictures, including RAGING BULL (the best film of the decade within the decade's first year!?!), AFTER HOURS, ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA, BLUE VELVET (*!), WALL STREET, TALK RADIO, and DO THE RIGHT THING, among many others!

THE 90s: 1990-1999 -- would contain every review, interview, best film list, festival report, etc. from "the best mob movie ever" (GOODFELLAS) to "the best movie of 1999" (BEING JOHN MALKOVICH), and everything in between, such as MAGNOLIA, DARK CITY (best film of 1998), BOOGIE NIGHTS, FARGO, NIXON, NATURAL BORN KILLERS, CASINO, HEAVEN & EARTH, SHORT CUTS, NAKED, MALCOLM X, CITY OF HOPE and MILLER'S CROSSING, among many others. This was the most vibrant decade for Ebert's writing, and it would be wonderful to see it in print.

Now this decade is only half over, so I would have to suggest something a little radical:

EBERT'S GUIDE TO THE NEW MILLENNIUM: 2000-2005 -- which would contain his reviews, festival reports, interviews, top ten lists, etc. from Oscar winner for Best Picture GLADIATOR (**!) to THE 40-YEAR-OLD VIRGIN, from REQUIEM FOR A DREAM to GANGS OF NEW YORK, from really terrible films like LOVE & SEX to CATWOMAN and CHRISTMAS WITH THE KRANKS, and many others. This would be a wonderful addition to any film lover's book collection.

A nice bonus would be not just a guide to every review either per decade, per book, or every review from 1967-2005 at the end of each book, but also a guide to that decade's Siskel & Ebert/ Ebert & Roeper ratings (thumbs up/thumbs down) from the beginning of the series (in the 70s, I think?) to the current format. They could even denote the episodes where a guest critic took part!

The only thing I would request about the FORMAT of this series of books, would be to keep it as close to the review format in the paper/website as possible. That means TITLE, star rating (with/without year of release), the by line / theatrical release date (date of print), the review and cast & credits at the end with the actors/participants on camera, the director(s) and writer(s) credits, and the MPAA rating and running time. If it's a foreign film, it should say if it's in another language with subtitles, which I don't believe his current editions do.

I THINK ROGER EBERT IS THE GREATEST FILM CRITIC EVER!!! If anyone can make a book or series of books this relevant and worth while, I believe he can. Now let's cross our fingers and hope he listens to me!

With all due respect, the passion and meticulousness that used to be found in Mr. Ebert's movie reviews are fairly much long gone.

These qualities began to fade from his work beginning in the early 1990's, but we must credit him for being on top of things for approximately 25 years (he began reviewing movies in the late 1960's). That's a heck of a long run and an accomplishment that Mr. Ebert can be darn proud of.

But don't misunderstand; I'm glad he's still around, championing passion and meticulousness, despite the fact that these qualities have been absent from his own work for about a decade and a half.

But I also want to say this: Ebert is quite a bit better than roughly half of the movie critics that are on the scene today.

I recommend Mr. Ebert's movie guide, but please don't restrict your attention solely to Mr. Ebert. There are other movie guides on your local bookstores' shelves that are superior to his. And don't forget to cruise the web for a number of very good movie critics that are at the height of their game, i.e., movie critics whose work contain plenty of passion and meticulousness.