Was Roger Ebert 'Team Bigelow'?

Roger Ebert gave Avatar four stars upon its release, but since then, we've detected a certain surliness from the iconic film critic. When compiling his Top Ten list for 2009, he left Avatar off the list and gave it its own "Special Jury Prize," preemptively stating, "No, that doesn't mean it's the best film of the year. It means it won the Special Jury Prize." Now, in the afterglow of James Cameron's Globes two-fer, Ebert took to Twitter to let us know how he really feels about Avatar. Don't sugarcoat it, Rog! [ebertchicago]


  • JM says:

    Maybe because the star system is a bit simplistic? I still haven't seen the movie but I'm sure that technology-wise it's a game changer despite its story faults. Also, it seems to be what Scorcese was talking about w/ Cecil B DeMille movies last night - a spectacle. Nothing wrong with a spectacle, with such grand entertainment but I can see why it wouldn't make Rog's top ten list.

  • CiscoMan says:

    Really surprising considering Ebert is an unabashed sci-fi geek. Perhaps he wasn't won over by all the unobtainium after all.
    By the way, Ebert on Twitter is a whole new animal. Maybe he was always like this, or maybe it's because he can no longer speak, but the man has taken to Twitter like the early adopter tech journalists that ushered Twitter to fame a couple years ago. He's really let loose. Probably my 2nd fave Twitter follow after @shitmydadsays.

  • Rafaela says:

    I also though Avatar was great and had a lot of fun watching it. It's a fun movie and I certainly will watch it more times than I will The Hurt Locker. That doesn't mean the movie is the best one though.
    The Hurt locker was one the one that deserved to win Best Picture Dramana AND Best Director...
    So yeah, give us a f--cking break! 🙂

  • Adam says:

    Dear Rafaela.
    I've got one little peice of advice for you. Not everyone will agree with you in life, The vast majority loved Avatar and James cameron is pioneering the way forward for the film industry essiently. The Hurt Locker is a great film, didnt deserve to take the prizes away from James Cameron though. Also isn't the director of The Hurt Locker, James Cameron's ex wife??? (Musta been tense when they sat in the room together in the awards show!)
    I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but Avatar had the vast majority of fans and the Hurt locker had a smaller group. Easy as that.
    In the end, Nither films were perfect, both had its flaws and thats okay.
    If life was always perfect and threw exactly what you wanted at you, it'd become dull.
    Peace out, Adam "British Bulldog" Clarke

  • I'm pretty sure I get what your saying

  • Roger Ebert is a funny sort of fellow - he writes pretty good reviews, but his taste in movies typically sucks. At least, I don't often find his arguments in favour or against movies to be overly compelling.
    Take The A-team as a case in point. Ebert was angrier than a Chilean Coal miner with this latest Hollywood remake. I really don't know why though. The A-Team is just a fun, well executed, summer action film. So why Ebert has to bring the laws of psychics into it is above me.
    Recently produced a counter argument myself against Ebert's tirade over at my blog, so check it out:
    Also find an Avatar 3-D and Avatar 2-D re-review over there.
    Thanks for the post