That's not his review, I'm pretty sure (unless my page is glitched up or something). All of his reviews have the title at the top, then his byline, then the review. What I'm seeing is the top two things but no actual review. I think the page is glitchy; let's check back in the morning.
(Some of Ebert's best writing is when he's ripping a movie apart, so I'm looking forward to it.)
(edited by Karlos the Jackal on 7.1.05 0350) Last 5 movies seen: Dead Man Walking - Dawn of the Dead (1978) - Harold and Kumar go to White Castle - Open Water - Twilight Samurai
Considering that Zundian didn't post a link to the website, and considering that he lives in the region where Ebert's paper is circulated, I wouldn't be surprised if that's the review. He's done it lots of times before.
Besides, I've heard the movie is all sorts of awful. Michael Keaton should've stayed in retirement on his ranch instead of reading this script.
The main page of rogerebert.com does not include a link to a White Noise review, nor does the main SunTimes page. Maybe it's just a template floating around? Because while a review that's just blank space would be hilarious, that's not a newspaper thing to do.
I'll see if I can grab a paper at lunch and scan in whatever's there. (I'll put it on my the W expense account.)
Originally posted by Roy.Considering that Zundian didn't post a link to the website, and considering that he lives in the region where Ebert's paper is circulated, I wouldn't be surprised if that's the review. He's done it lots of times before.
Has he? For what? I don't remember him ever being anything ever than verbose -- especially with stuff he really doesn't like. ("I hated this movie. Hated hated hated hated hated this movie." "It should be cut up to provide free ukelele picks for the poor.")
**EDIT: Plus, last night there was a link from his main page to a review page for White Noise, but the link's been taken down now. Must've been a reason to do that.
(edited by Karlos the Jackal on 7.1.05 1425) Last 5 movies seen: Dead Man Walking - Dawn of the Dead (1978) - Harold and Kumar go to White Castle - Open Water - Twilight Samurai
After seeing the trailer a few months ago, I was kinda psyched to go see it. Sure, it had Deborah Kara Unger in it, but Keaton cancels her out and the premise was interesting.
Anyway, while it wasn't super excellent or anything, it did make me jump twice and Serena squealed once. It wasn't gory and had very little bloodshed, yet it was creepy. I can't believe I'm saying this, but watching Keaton on screen staring at TV fuzz for ten minutes was actually interesting. His performance is up there with ONE GOOD COP, and CLEAN AND SOBER. He really carried the film.
The effects were well done and didn't take anything away from the film. Movies like this tend to allow the effects to rule whats going on, but this was more character driven. The effects wer not cheesy either, which I was a little afraid of before even sitting down.
Over all, I'd give it four out of five stars and recomend it to any one who enjoys horror films that are not bloody.
Ebert be damned!
Cerebus: RIP 1977-2004.
"What do you think it's like being created by a manic-depressive, paranoid schizophrenic, hypochondriac, misogynist with delusions of grandeur and a messiah complex?"
Originally posted by Cerebus...and yet again, Ebert is wrong.
Ebert be damned!
Argh! We still don't know what Ebert said about it! Or even if he saw it! It's not on his website! It's not on the Ebert & Roeper website! It's not in the Sun-Times! Stop disagreeing with opinions that haven't been expressed yet!
(My apologies if you've actually seen a review somewhere, in which case please post a link because, as I said, I'd like to read it.)
I'm not a Keaton fan -- I find him and his mouth annoying -- but if you like it, well, I might just check it out on DVD. I do, in fact, enjoy scary films but I'm not big on splatter, so I might just like it.
Last 5 movies seen: Babette's Feast - Dead Man Walking - Dawn of the Dead (1978) - Harold and Kumar go to White Castle - Open Water
Originally posted by Karlos the JackalHas he? For what? I don't remember him ever being anything ever than verbose -- especially with stuff he really doesn't like.
See, now I'm doubting that he did. I could've sworn that he did, but I've looked through all of by Ebert books (I'm an Ebert nerd) and online at most of his zero star reviews, and I can't find anything. Perhaps I'm confusing him with Siskel or maybe he told a story about a two word review somewhere.
If Ebert's gonna review it, I'd expect to see it tomorrow (Sunday). But I doubt he's going to, because most of the Sunday reviews are for movies that weren't viewed by the press, and this movie was screened for the press (but maybe it shouldn't have been, judging by the 10% fresh reviews on RottenTomatoes).