Life Itself. The Roger Ebert Documentary

[Jim3k]

Life Itself. What a title. But taken from Roger Ebert’s own memoir.

This film, a biographic documentary on Ebert, will never do a large box office. But it is still a great film and every movie buff and wannabe critic should find it and see it. Probably playing only in art houses. IMdb rates it 8.3 and RT’s critics rate it 96% (its movie goers give it 91%).

This is an unsentimental look at Roger Ebert’s life and death. And, while we all think we know that Ebert brought movie criticism to the TV screen and we enjoyed his character as he matured, there is so much we didn’t know—and most of what we didn’t know only enhances Ebert’s contribution to America, the society. And, most of we followers who watched him deteriorate as cancer struck him in 2006 will be shocked at what he went through. Yet we will also be amazed at his iron will to defeat it. He went through hell.

You will also see his wife Chaz step up to the plate as few women ever have. That woman deserves a medal for valor for her commitment to him as he fought the cancer. She may even be the star of the movie, though she would reject the concept.

The film is by documentarian Steve James who had access to Roger during his last years. James did a nice job researching Roger’s early years and his commitment to a newspaper career. He became the editor of the Daily Illini during the height of the civil rights protests and connected murders, writing some of the most insightful commentary of the times. As his voice grew after his Pulitzer, he offered similar high quality commentary on Americana as well.

Ebert walked with the Giants of the film industry. He and partner Gene Siskel early recognized Martin Scorsese’s talents and were instrumental in turning him into an internationally acclaimed director. Scorsese, not so incidentally, is one of the film’s producers. He would have it no other way.

For those who loved Siskel (who died in 1999), the movie is a happy funny, yet sad retrospective on their relationship. Each was terrific singly, but together they were incredible, both on and off the screen. James found some outtakes that balance the serious parts of the documentary. They are hilarious.

If you can, see this film. You will be the better for it.

[Jim3k]

Knowing that the film is in limited release, I searched rogerebert (dot) com and found this national list of theaters where it is playing. Scroll down to get the second week release since the list was expanded. I also see that it is No. 1 in "specialty box office," whatever that is.

[weezie]

I heard his wife and the film's director interviewed on "Fresh Air" and it was very compelling, if also a bit unnerving.
I hope I can at least summon a bit of Ebert's courage when I watch the film.
Thanks Jim3k.

[Olympic Fan]

Thanks for mentioning this ...

I should mention that Steve James, the documentary director, is the same guy who did Hoop Dreams, maybe the greatest sports documentary ever made. Ebert was a big fan -- he picked Hoop Dreams as his No. 1 movie of 1994 and the greatest film of the 1990s. In 2007, the International Documentary Association voted Hoop Dreams the best documentary in film history (at least I think that was the criteria -- the list includes films back to 1967 ... but doesn't include any of Flaherty's masterpieces from the '20s and '30s)

The fact that Hoop Dreams was not nominated for an academy award was such as scandal that for the first time ever the voting lists were made public ... and led to a revision of the rules.

I expect James to knock this one out of the park.

[JasonEvans]

I've been dying to see this flick. I have heard that Life Itself is fabulous!

The fact that Hoop Dreams was not nominated for an academy award was such as scandal that for the first time ever the voting lists were made public ... and led to a revision of the rules.

1994 was a crazy year for award nominations, largely because it was a year full of high-quality films. Still, the failure to nominate Hoop Dreams for even Best Documentary is outrageous. I recall thinking it should have gotten a Best Picture nomination as well. Looking back, it is certainly better than two of the best picture nominees (Four Weddings and a Funeral and Quiz Show). I wanted Lion King to get a Best Picture nomination that year too.

I long for a year like 1994 to come along again. Look at this list of truly iconic films that came out that year -- we are talking about movies that still resonate today, 20 years later.

Hoop Dreams
Forrest Gump
Pulp Fiction
Shawshank Redemption
Lion King
Clerks
The Professional (the film that introduced the world to Nathalie Portman and writer/director Luc Besson)

Plus, while not quite on a level with the above, that year also brought us: Quiz Show, Four Weddings and a Funeral, Speed, The River Wild, Ace Ventura: Pet Detective , The Mask, Dumb & Dumber, True Lies (among my favorite Ah-nold films), Legends of the Fall, The Adventures of Priscilla Queen of the Desert, Interview with the Vampire, Stargate, The Crow, Ed Wood, Timecop (guilty pleasure of mine), The Santa Clause, It Could Happen To You, and much more. It was a staggeringly good year for film.

Sorry to get this thread off course -- anytime someone brings up 1994 in films, it gets me kind weepy longing for another year as good as that one. I bet Roger would agree with me.

-Jason "that's right, the relatively unknown Jim Carey became a mega-star in 1994 with 3 huge hits in one year" Evans

[Olympic Fan]

Not to hijack the thread -- although nothing could honor Roger Ebert more than celebrating our enthusiasm for film ...

I agree that 1994 was a pretty wonderful year, but in recent times, I've always thought 1998 was the pinnacle ...

It was the year Shakespeare in Love (a wonderful entertainment) beat out Saving Private Ryan (a much greater film) for best picture.

It was the year of The Big Lebowski (the Coen Brothers masterpiece), Wes Anderson's Rushmore, Todd Solondz's Happiness and Malick's The Thin Red Line. We had the truly remarkable Dark City. It was the year of Benigni -- one of the most surprising performances in history in his Life Is Beautiful. Gary Ross gave us what I think is the most innovative and underrated films of the decade -- Pleasantville. We had American History X. We had Wild Things.

The box office champion was Armageddon ... one of two movies about an asteroid threatening earth ... Deep Impact also made the top 10 box office. Godzilla was generally rated a flop, but it finished No. 3 in the international box office (and is a personal guilty pleasure ... especially since it featured two characters named Siskel and Ebert).

We had There's Something About Mary, The Truman Show and Primary Colors. Lindsay Lohan's career hit its peak at age 11 in The Parent Trap. We had The Waterboy (another guilty pleasure). We had the Horse Whisperer.

In animation, we had Antz, A Bug's Life and Mulan.

It was also the year that Akira Kurosawa, the greatest filmmaker who ever lived, died.

Ebert's Top 10 for 1998:
1. Dark City
2. Pleasantville
3. Saving Private Ryan
4. A Simple Plan
5. Happiness
6. Elizabeth
7. Babe
8. Shakespeare in Love
9. Life is Beautiful
10. Primary Colors

Funny, Ebert lists about two dozen other notable films for 1998, but fails to mention The Big Lebowski. Oh well, everybody can have a blind spot.

[JasonEvans]

1988 was a great year, but is there a single film that came out that year that is better and more significant than:

Hoop Dreams
Forrest Gump
Pulp Fiction
Shawshank Redemption
Lion King
or Clerks?

-Jason "might be fun to have a poll/debate contest for 'best film year' -- need to figure out a few more nominees" Evans

[FerryFor50]

1988 was a great year, but is there a single film that came out that year that is better and more significant than:

Hoop Dreams
Forrest Gump
Pulp Fiction
Shawshank Redemption
Lion King
or Clerks?

-Jason "might be fun to have a poll/debate contest for 'best film year' -- need to figure out a few more nominees" Evans

I'd argue that The Big Lebowski could unseat every film on that list other than Pulp Fiction and Shawshank. I still consider it the Coen Brothers' opus.

[rasputin]

1988 was a great year, but is there a single film that came out that year that is better and more significant than:

Hoop Dreams
Forrest Gump
Pulp Fiction
Shawshank Redemption
Lion King
or Clerks?

-Jason "might be fun to have a poll/debate contest for 'best film year' -- need to figure out a few more nominees" Evans

1939 includes Gone With the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, Goodbye Mr. Chips, Stagecoach, Of Mice and Men, Wuthering Heights, Dark Victory, Ninotchka, and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington

1940 includes Rebecca, The Grapes of Wrath, The Letter, The Philadelphia Story, The Great Dictator, Foreign Correspondent, Boom Town, and Fantasia.

My vote goes for 1939.

[Mal]

1988 was a great year, but is there a single film that came out that year that is better and more..

Yes.

Pulp Fiction and Hoop Dreams are the only two of those films that, 20 years on, still seem truly remarkable. I love Shawshank and it stands the test of time as a narrative film, but it was a very fine piece of craftsmanship rather than a game changer. Of the others on your list, one was a fun animated flick but it was a piece of a broader reawakening started 5 or 6 years before it; one is an execrable piece of overly sentimental self-congratulatory Boomer bait; and one was a smart little film that I find it hard to sit through anymore. Re: '98, Saving Private Ryan screams "Important" and took the genre of war films to a new place entirely, and Thin Red Line did the same thing in a different direction (plus it's gorgeous); American History X is a better film than most from '94; and I'd argue that Rushmore, as the breakthrough for Wes Anderson, which spawned a whole new aesthetic of hyperliterate ennui-tinged tweeness, and the new, dour Bill Murray we'd see for the next 20 years, is a pretty meaningful inclusion, too. And to echo others, Lebowski is to its year what Shawshank is to 1994 - criminally underappreciated, now a pop culture classic with numerous phrases that have entered the lexicon.

I don't think either year is markedly "better" than the other, personally. As long as we're playing this game, let's not forget 1974, though: Godfather II, Blazing Saddles, and Chinatown is a solid foundation for any year.

[Olympic Fan]

1988 was a great year, but is there a single film that came out that year that is better and more significant than:

Hoop Dreams
Forrest Gump
Pulp Fiction
Shawshank Redemption
Lion King
or Clerks?

-Jason "might be fun to have a poll/debate contest for 'best film year' -- need to figure out a few more nominees" Evans

1988? I was talking about 1998.

And I don't agree with your evaluation -- your first three are all pretty timeless films, but so are Saving Private Ryan, The Big Lebowski and Dark City ... Shawshank is much like Shakespeare in Love -- both are nice narrative films, both greatly entertaining, but nothing groundbreaking. I love Clerks and it's a wonderful piece of guerrilla filmmaking, but hardly a great movie.

1998 was a better year ...

But as Rasputin brings up, 1939 is generally rated by most film historians as the greatest year in film history. He mentions Gone With the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, Goodbye Mr. Chips, Stagecoach, Of Mice and Men, Wuthering Heights, Dark Victory, Ninotchka, and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington ...

But that doesn't include the greatest film of the year (and one of the five best of all time): Renoir's Rules of the Game or the great Korda film The Four Feathers. He doesn't include two of the three John Ford films -- the greatest one-year production by a single director in screen history (Stagecoach, Young Mr. Lincoln and Drums Along the Mohawk). Wellman's Beau Geste ... Destry Rides Again ... Hope's delightful The Cat and the Canary ... Cagney and Raft in Each Dawn I Die ... The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes ... the great George Stevens' Gunga Din ... Hawks' Only Angels Have Wings ... Love Affair ... Stanley and Livingstone ... Confessions of a Nazi Spy ... Carol, Reed's The Stars Look Down ... Carne's La Jour se leve .. Cukor's The Women ... The Hunchback of Notre Dame and two of my personal favorites -- Ralph Richardson and Laurence Olivier's underrated Q Planes and the Ritz Brothers version of the Three Musketeers.

Only downer to the year was At the Circus -- a second-rate Marx Brothers (although second rate Marx Brothers is better than first rate almost anything else)

I would argue that 1939 was the peak of the Hollywood system (supplemented with some great foreign films). Just below the peak are 1940 and 1938 (in that order) with 1941 just another step down.

The years we're debating -- 1994 and 1998 -- aren't in that class. But take a look at the late 1960s -- I think there was another peak -- the peak coming in '68 with very great years in 1967. 1969 and 1970. Hmm, I was looking at 1974 as Mal suggested -- I see a few good movies at the top, but not a ton of depth.

[Mal]

Hmm, I was looking at 1974 as Mal suggested -- I see a few good movies at the top, but not a ton of depth.

True point, not a ton of depth. Although, there is a little more than the three I mentioned. Brooks also released Young Frankenstein that year; Texas Chainsaw Massacre, whatever we might think of it as a work of art, was a pretty seminal movie and was hugely influential; and two forgotten but I think outstanding films from great directors were also there - The Conversation (Coppola) and Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore (Scorcese). In any event, it can't stand up to the ridiculous output of those several years right before WWII, or the top early years of the New Hollywood golden age, but I think it stacks up alright with either of those years we're talking about in the '90's.

Of the others Oly mentions, I think '69's gotta be among the best buddy movie/Westerns years ever: Butch and Sundance, True Grit, Easy Rider, Midnight Cowboy, and The Wild Bunch.

[FerryFor50]

The years we're debating -- 1994 and 1998 -- aren't in that class.

I think you are grossly underrating films like It's Pat (1994) and Rodney Dangerfield's Mafia spoof The Godson (1998).