What do you think?
Rate this book
The Great Movies IV
No film critic has ever been as influential—or as beloved— as Roger Ebert. Over more than four decades, he built a reputation writing reviews for the Chicago Sun-Times and, later, arguing onscreen with rival Chicago Tribune critic Gene Siskel and later Richard Roeper about the movies they loved and loathed. But Ebert went well beyond a mere “thumbs up” or “thumbs down.” Readers could always sense the man behind the words, a man with interests beyond film and a lifetime’s distilled wisdom about the larger world. Although the world lost one of its most important critics far too early, Ebert lives on in the minds of moviegoers today, who continually find themselves debating what he might have thought about a current movie.
The Great Movies IV is the fourth—and final—collection of Roger Ebert’s essays, comprising sixty-two reviews of films ranging from the silent era to the recent past. From films like The Cabinet of Caligari and Viridiana that have been considered canonical for decades to movies only recently recognized as masterpieces to Superman, The Big Lebowski, and Pink The Wall, the pieces gathered here demonstrate the critical acumen seen in Ebert’s daily reviews and the more reflective and wide-ranging considerations that the longer format allowed him to offer. Ebert’s essays are joined here by an insightful foreword by film critic Matt Zoller Seitz, the current editor-in-chief of the official Roger Ebert website, and a touching introduction by Chaz Ebert.
A fitting capstone to a truly remarkable career, The Great Movies IV will introduce newcomers to some of the most exceptional movies ever made, while revealing new insights to connoisseurs as well.
The Great Movies IV is the fourth—and final—collection of Roger Ebert’s essays, comprising sixty-two reviews of films ranging from the silent era to the recent past. From films like The Cabinet of Caligari and Viridiana that have been considered canonical for decades to movies only recently recognized as masterpieces to Superman, The Big Lebowski, and Pink The Wall, the pieces gathered here demonstrate the critical acumen seen in Ebert’s daily reviews and the more reflective and wide-ranging considerations that the longer format allowed him to offer. Ebert’s essays are joined here by an insightful foreword by film critic Matt Zoller Seitz, the current editor-in-chief of the official Roger Ebert website, and a touching introduction by Chaz Ebert.
A fitting capstone to a truly remarkable career, The Great Movies IV will introduce newcomers to some of the most exceptional movies ever made, while revealing new insights to connoisseurs as well.
251 pages, Hardcover
First published September 28, 2016
107 people are currently reading
357 people want to read
About the author
Roger Ebert
91 books406 followersRoger Joseph Ebert was a Pulitzer Prize-winning American film critic and screenwriter.
He was known for his weekly review column (appearing in the Chicago Sun-Times since 1967, and later online) and for the television program Siskel & Ebert at the Movies, which he co-hosted for 23 years with Gene Siskel. After Siskel's death in 1999, he auditioned several potential replacements, ultimately choosing Richard Roeper to fill the open chair. The program was retitled Ebert & Roeper and the Movies in 2000.
Ebert's movie reviews were syndicated to more than 200 newspapers in the United States and abroad. He wrote more than 15 books, including his annual movie yearbook. In 1975, Ebert became the first film critic to win a Pulitzer Prize for Criticism. His television programs have also been widely syndicated, and have been nominated for Emmy awards. In February 1995, a section of Chicago's Erie Street near the CBS Studios was given the honorary name Siskel & Ebert Way. Ebert was awarded a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame in June 2005, the first professional film critic to receive one. Roger Ebert was named as the most influential pundit in America by Forbes Magazine, beating the likes of Bill Maher, Lou Dobbs, and Bill O'Reilly.[2] He has honorary degrees from the University of Colorado, the American Film Institute, and the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.
From 1994 until his death in 2013, he wrote a Great Movies series of individual reviews of what he deemed to be the most important films of all time. He also hosted the annual Roger Ebert's Overlooked Film Festival in Champaign, Illinois from 1999 until his death.
He was known for his weekly review column (appearing in the Chicago Sun-Times since 1967, and later online) and for the television program Siskel & Ebert at the Movies, which he co-hosted for 23 years with Gene Siskel. After Siskel's death in 1999, he auditioned several potential replacements, ultimately choosing Richard Roeper to fill the open chair. The program was retitled Ebert & Roeper and the Movies in 2000.
Ebert's movie reviews were syndicated to more than 200 newspapers in the United States and abroad. He wrote more than 15 books, including his annual movie yearbook. In 1975, Ebert became the first film critic to win a Pulitzer Prize for Criticism. His television programs have also been widely syndicated, and have been nominated for Emmy awards. In February 1995, a section of Chicago's Erie Street near the CBS Studios was given the honorary name Siskel & Ebert Way. Ebert was awarded a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame in June 2005, the first professional film critic to receive one. Roger Ebert was named as the most influential pundit in America by Forbes Magazine, beating the likes of Bill Maher, Lou Dobbs, and Bill O'Reilly.[2] He has honorary degrees from the University of Colorado, the American Film Institute, and the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.
From 1994 until his death in 2013, he wrote a Great Movies series of individual reviews of what he deemed to be the most important films of all time. He also hosted the annual Roger Ebert's Overlooked Film Festival in Champaign, Illinois from 1999 until his death.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
February 14, 2017
Here, now, is the last collection of Great Movie reviews, written by Roger Ebert before his death in 2013. Like the last set, this one also includes no photos of the films inside (which volumes I and II provided) -- a shame, since the reviews on his website each include a color photo. One wonders if there were legal or logistical reasons for not including them in this book.
No matter. The main thing is the reviews themselves, and they are up to the same exalted level as his previous volumes, if shorter than the other three (Ebert finished only sixty-two reviews between volume III and his death, while the other three books include one hundred reviews apiece). As Matt Zoller Seitz, editor-in-chief of rogerebert.com, writes in his foreword, "...The Great Movies series [are] Roger's masterpiece." (x)
Should other writers have contributed to this volume in order to include an even hundred reviews? I don't think so, and neither does his widow Chaz, who writes the following in her introduction: "It was suggested that perhaps we could get pieces written by others to round out the edition, but in my heart of hearts I wanted to keep his series pure." (xviii) Exactly right. Chaz also highlights the one review that needs to be highlighted in this collection: for The Ballad of Narayama, the last Great Movie review he wrote. The film is about a village that leaves its elders on the side of a mountain when they reach the age of 70. Roger Ebert was 70 when he wrote the review; and he was 70 when he died. I often wondered if this final volume, if it materialized (for it was only published at the end of last year), would include that entry as its last one. Instead, it's listed alphabetically, like all previous volumes, but Chaz's highlighting of it serves the same purpose. Instead, the last essay in this volume is for Yellow Submarine, which seems oddly appropriate.
The foreword and introduction are followed by snippets from Roger's intros to The Great Movies I-III before launching into his review for 25th Hour. The reviews stretch from the silent era (The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari) to the very recent (Departures). What I admire about these essays is not only the humanity through which Ebert views these films, but also the fact that, even though they may be great films, he isn't above criticizing their less-than-great aspects, while pointing out what makes them have staying power.
His greatest gift, however, is the personal touch he brings to each review. While reading them, I've always felt like I'm watching the movie with him, and I've made it a point, after watching one of the movies listed in this and previous volumes, of reading (or re-reading) his take on it, to see if I missed anything.
Now, I was lucky enough to meet Roger Ebert once at Ebertfest. He knew who I was because he'd read some of my blog posts. I knew who he was because he was Roger Ebert. As he shook my hand, I was surprised at how strong his grip was, coming from this frail-looking man who no longer had use of his voice and walked with a shuffle. His grip may have lessened in the years since his death, but the power of his words have not. We are lucky that he left us as much writing as he did, for there will never be another Roger Ebert.
No matter. The main thing is the reviews themselves, and they are up to the same exalted level as his previous volumes, if shorter than the other three (Ebert finished only sixty-two reviews between volume III and his death, while the other three books include one hundred reviews apiece). As Matt Zoller Seitz, editor-in-chief of rogerebert.com, writes in his foreword, "...The Great Movies series [are] Roger's masterpiece." (x)
Should other writers have contributed to this volume in order to include an even hundred reviews? I don't think so, and neither does his widow Chaz, who writes the following in her introduction: "It was suggested that perhaps we could get pieces written by others to round out the edition, but in my heart of hearts I wanted to keep his series pure." (xviii) Exactly right. Chaz also highlights the one review that needs to be highlighted in this collection: for The Ballad of Narayama, the last Great Movie review he wrote. The film is about a village that leaves its elders on the side of a mountain when they reach the age of 70. Roger Ebert was 70 when he wrote the review; and he was 70 when he died. I often wondered if this final volume, if it materialized (for it was only published at the end of last year), would include that entry as its last one. Instead, it's listed alphabetically, like all previous volumes, but Chaz's highlighting of it serves the same purpose. Instead, the last essay in this volume is for Yellow Submarine, which seems oddly appropriate.
The foreword and introduction are followed by snippets from Roger's intros to The Great Movies I-III before launching into his review for 25th Hour. The reviews stretch from the silent era (The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari) to the very recent (Departures). What I admire about these essays is not only the humanity through which Ebert views these films, but also the fact that, even though they may be great films, he isn't above criticizing their less-than-great aspects, while pointing out what makes them have staying power.
His greatest gift, however, is the personal touch he brings to each review. While reading them, I've always felt like I'm watching the movie with him, and I've made it a point, after watching one of the movies listed in this and previous volumes, of reading (or re-reading) his take on it, to see if I missed anything.
Now, I was lucky enough to meet Roger Ebert once at Ebertfest. He knew who I was because he'd read some of my blog posts. I knew who he was because he was Roger Ebert. As he shook my hand, I was surprised at how strong his grip was, coming from this frail-looking man who no longer had use of his voice and walked with a shuffle. His grip may have lessened in the years since his death, but the power of his words have not. We are lucky that he left us as much writing as he did, for there will never be another Roger Ebert.
December 18, 2016
What a beautiful holiday gift for film lovers: one final volume of Roger Ebert's amazing movie reviews, lovingly selected by his widow, Chaz Ebert.
This final volume of movie musings celebrates his abject love of cinema and includes reviews of a diverse collection of films, including "Superman" "Lost in Translation", "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari", "Stagecoach", "Viridania", "Shoah", and "A Man Escaped".
Ebert's essays are gems of cinematic meditation. They share things about their subjects that make you want to see the films again, just to see those little items he talks about that you missed the first time out. As in the three previous "Great Movies" collections, you are again treated to a treasure trove of facts about the actors, directors, and some of the events on the sets. These anecdotes round the reviews out beautifully and, if you allow them to, Will inspire you to watch a film you thought beyond you, or you thought would bore you. How often has he proved me wrong on that score!
Roger Ebert is sorely missed by millions of movie-goers. Thanks to his wonderful wife, Chaz, and Matt Zoller Seitz (whom Chaz hired to edit their website, RogerEbert.com, which they established after Ebert's death in 2013), we have the final thoughts of a beloved movie critic whose essays (in Seitz's says in his "Forward"), "[make you] feel as if he's on the phone with you, or sitting across from you at a restaurant or writing you a personal e-mail".
That intimate touch was Ebert's gift to film fans all over the world. Merry Christmas to Chaz and thank you for giving us one more dose of Roger Ebert's passion for both movies in general and for talking to us about them.
This final volume of movie musings celebrates his abject love of cinema and includes reviews of a diverse collection of films, including "Superman" "Lost in Translation", "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari", "Stagecoach", "Viridania", "Shoah", and "A Man Escaped".
Ebert's essays are gems of cinematic meditation. They share things about their subjects that make you want to see the films again, just to see those little items he talks about that you missed the first time out. As in the three previous "Great Movies" collections, you are again treated to a treasure trove of facts about the actors, directors, and some of the events on the sets. These anecdotes round the reviews out beautifully and, if you allow them to, Will inspire you to watch a film you thought beyond you, or you thought would bore you. How often has he proved me wrong on that score!
Roger Ebert is sorely missed by millions of movie-goers. Thanks to his wonderful wife, Chaz, and Matt Zoller Seitz (whom Chaz hired to edit their website, RogerEbert.com, which they established after Ebert's death in 2013), we have the final thoughts of a beloved movie critic whose essays (in Seitz's says in his "Forward"), "[make you] feel as if he's on the phone with you, or sitting across from you at a restaurant or writing you a personal e-mail".
That intimate touch was Ebert's gift to film fans all over the world. Merry Christmas to Chaz and thank you for giving us one more dose of Roger Ebert's passion for both movies in general and for talking to us about them.
January 25, 2017
I especially enjoyed reading reviews of some wonderful pictures I have cherished such as Senso, Spirit of the Beehive, Day for Night, Heart of Glass, and films I now need to watch. What a lovely man Mr. Ebert was.
May 28, 2020
For a moment, imagine an activity (a vocation or an avocation) that gives you a great deal of pleasure. Imagine also that you know your time to enjoy it will soon be coming to an end. What will you do to say your farewell?
Roger Ebert, a film critic and scholar who had greatly influenced my appreciation of film, had written a series of three GREAT MOVIES books. Each contained updated essays of motion pictures that had been meaningful to him ... perhaps from the lessons they taught, the perspectives they provided, the sheer beauty of their presentation, or perhaps it was simply a matter of completely transporting him into a euphoric world of sheer entertainment. (When Roger Ebert was at his best, he reminded me of a film enthusiast who was so excited that he couldn’t wait to tell you about what he had seen.)
When it was obvious that his health was on a downward course, he wanted to do another collection: THE GREAT MOVIES IV. He managed to include 62 films instead of his usual 100. The final one was “The Ballad of Narayama,” a Japanese story of a small village that requires everyone who reaches the age of 70 to go to a certain mountain and wait to die so that the other villagers will have more resources. Roger Ebert died at the age of 70.
Although it was unintentionally the shortest, THE GREAT MOVIES IV is by far my favorite book of the series. The films selected were often “special” ... not just Great Movies, but ones he seemed to want to be sure we knew about.
These were the ones I have not yet seen that are now on my Watchlist:
* An Autumn Afternoon
* The Ballad of Narayama
* Cache
* La Ceremonie
* Come and See
* French Cancan
* The Grey Zone
* The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
* The Only Son
* Red Beard
* Richard III (with Ian McKellen)
* Rio Bravo
* Shoah
Many of the films he mentioned would be on my list of Great Movies, too:
* Badlands
* Barry Lyndon
* The Big Lebowski
* The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
* Departures
* Diary of a Lost Girl
* Harakiri
* In A Lonely Place
* Lost in Translation
* Make Way For Tomorrow
* Mulholland Drive
* Night Moves
* Seven
* Smiles of a Summer Night
* Souls For Sale
* Spirited Away
* Stagecoach
* Viridiana
This time, there were only two films he mentioned that would not have made my list, but I’m willing to admit that my opinion might change if I saw them again:
* The Spirit of the Beehive - EVERYONE tells me that this film is a masterpiece. I have the sense that I’m really missing the key element. I struggled through it.
* Superman - Christopher Reeve will always be my image of Superman. Whenever the film took itself seriously, it had me heart and soul. For the most part, the comedy and parodies (which were the bulk of the movie) struck me as being an opportunity missed. And that ending ... well, don’t get me started. I do play the soundtrack from time to time, though.
GREAT MOVIES IV is much more than a film review book, and is more than the previous three volumes. It is an emotional and philosophical journey into what makes films magical. Although I’m extremely pleased to have read them, it is a bittersweet appreciation knowing that there won’t be more of them.
Very highly recommended.
Roger Ebert, a film critic and scholar who had greatly influenced my appreciation of film, had written a series of three GREAT MOVIES books. Each contained updated essays of motion pictures that had been meaningful to him ... perhaps from the lessons they taught, the perspectives they provided, the sheer beauty of their presentation, or perhaps it was simply a matter of completely transporting him into a euphoric world of sheer entertainment. (When Roger Ebert was at his best, he reminded me of a film enthusiast who was so excited that he couldn’t wait to tell you about what he had seen.)
When it was obvious that his health was on a downward course, he wanted to do another collection: THE GREAT MOVIES IV. He managed to include 62 films instead of his usual 100. The final one was “The Ballad of Narayama,” a Japanese story of a small village that requires everyone who reaches the age of 70 to go to a certain mountain and wait to die so that the other villagers will have more resources. Roger Ebert died at the age of 70.
Although it was unintentionally the shortest, THE GREAT MOVIES IV is by far my favorite book of the series. The films selected were often “special” ... not just Great Movies, but ones he seemed to want to be sure we knew about.
These were the ones I have not yet seen that are now on my Watchlist:
* An Autumn Afternoon
* The Ballad of Narayama
* Cache
* La Ceremonie
* Come and See
* French Cancan
* The Grey Zone
* The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
* The Only Son
* Red Beard
* Richard III (with Ian McKellen)
* Rio Bravo
* Shoah
Many of the films he mentioned would be on my list of Great Movies, too:
* Badlands
* Barry Lyndon
* The Big Lebowski
* The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
* Departures
* Diary of a Lost Girl
* Harakiri
* In A Lonely Place
* Lost in Translation
* Make Way For Tomorrow
* Mulholland Drive
* Night Moves
* Seven
* Smiles of a Summer Night
* Souls For Sale
* Spirited Away
* Stagecoach
* Viridiana
This time, there were only two films he mentioned that would not have made my list, but I’m willing to admit that my opinion might change if I saw them again:
* The Spirit of the Beehive - EVERYONE tells me that this film is a masterpiece. I have the sense that I’m really missing the key element. I struggled through it.
* Superman - Christopher Reeve will always be my image of Superman. Whenever the film took itself seriously, it had me heart and soul. For the most part, the comedy and parodies (which were the bulk of the movie) struck me as being an opportunity missed. And that ending ... well, don’t get me started. I do play the soundtrack from time to time, though.
GREAT MOVIES IV is much more than a film review book, and is more than the previous three volumes. It is an emotional and philosophical journey into what makes films magical. Although I’m extremely pleased to have read them, it is a bittersweet appreciation knowing that there won’t be more of them.
Very highly recommended.
January 31, 2017
Sadly the final book in Ebert's Great Movies series, considerably shorter than the other editions, but an essential entry nonetheless.
October 27, 2016
More solid essays from the master of film writing & criticism.
November 9, 2017
The Great Movies IV is the fourth and, unfortunately, last of Roger Ebert's books about films he considered great. They are not, he writes, the greatest films ever made; they are just films that he thinks are among the many great movies that have been made.
With each successive book in this series, the percentage of films included that I have seen has gone down. In this volume, I have seen only about a third of the films discussed.
The first three books each included 100 films (mostly - some times Ebert treated a film series as one film). This book has only 62 reviews; Ebert died before he could do more.
Greatness in art is always subjective. Of the films that I have seen that Ebert writes about, some I also think are great; some I do not. At least one group of two films, Sergei Eisenstein's Ivan The Terrible, Parts I and II, Ebert clearly does not consider great himself; he evidently includes them only because they are "so routinely included on lists of the great films." (I like these more than Ebert does; I think that the actor playing Ivan, Nikolai Cherkasov, is one of the best actors in the history of film.)
Films reviewed here that I agree are wonderful include The Circus, Diary of a Country Priest, A Man Escaped, and Smiles of a Summer Night. The one film on which I strongly disagree is The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, which I realize is considered great by many beside Roger Ebert.
But whether I agree with Ebert or not, his reviews and commentary are always very much worth reading. For one example, I had not seen (or even heard of) The Hairdresser's Husband, but Ebert's description makes me want to see it as soon as possible. Ebert clearly loved movies and the enormous possibilities they held and that shows in all his film writing.
Unfortunately, the book is replete with errors, not of opinion but of fact. I am going to mention just a few:
Shoah:
Filip Muller, a Jew who survived Auschwitz, tells of what happened in the gas chambers. And then, he is asked: "And when the doors were opened?"
Answer: "They fell out. People fell out like blocks of stone, like rocks falling out of a truck."
And then Ebert writes:
The images evoked by his words are unutterably painful. What is remarkable, on reflection, is that Muller is describing an event that neither he or anyone else now alive ever saw.
What does Ebert mean? Is he saying that Muller and everyone else who described what happened in the gas chambers are lying? Surely not. I believe that what Ebert wrote was different than what is printed here and somehow it got scrambled and the meaning was changed.
Ivan the Terrible, Parts I and II:
Ebert discusses the sets used in Carl Dreyer's superb film The Passion of Joan of Arc and compares them to the sets in Ivan:
Eisenstein's sets are incompatibly larger, but often evoke the same look.
Does Ebert mean "incomparably" rather than " incompatibly?" If not, then what does "incompatibly" mean here?
Smiles Of a Summer Night:
The main character's name is Fredrik Egerman, not "Engerman" as given here.
The Spirit of the Beehive:
I haven't seen The Spirit of the Beehive, but surely Ebert is wrong when he describes a scene from the 1931 film of Frankenstein:
The creature comes upon a farmer's young daughter tossing flowers into a pond to watch them float. Perhaps because of censorship, the film cuts directly from this to the monster mournfully carrying the child's drowned body through the village.
I believe it is the child's father who carries her.
Stagecoach:
Ebert writes:
One is reminded of Marlene Dietrich: "I didn't become Shanghai Lil in one night."
The actual quote (from Shanghai Express):
"It took more than one man to change my name to Shanghai Lily."
These are some of the errors I happened to spot without making any effort to find them. I suspect that had Roger Ebert lived to complete this book, much of this would have been corrected.
And that just adds one more item to the long list of reasons that Ebert is so badly missed.
With each successive book in this series, the percentage of films included that I have seen has gone down. In this volume, I have seen only about a third of the films discussed.
The first three books each included 100 films (mostly - some times Ebert treated a film series as one film). This book has only 62 reviews; Ebert died before he could do more.
Greatness in art is always subjective. Of the films that I have seen that Ebert writes about, some I also think are great; some I do not. At least one group of two films, Sergei Eisenstein's Ivan The Terrible, Parts I and II, Ebert clearly does not consider great himself; he evidently includes them only because they are "so routinely included on lists of the great films." (I like these more than Ebert does; I think that the actor playing Ivan, Nikolai Cherkasov, is one of the best actors in the history of film.)
Films reviewed here that I agree are wonderful include The Circus, Diary of a Country Priest, A Man Escaped, and Smiles of a Summer Night. The one film on which I strongly disagree is The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, which I realize is considered great by many beside Roger Ebert.
But whether I agree with Ebert or not, his reviews and commentary are always very much worth reading. For one example, I had not seen (or even heard of) The Hairdresser's Husband, but Ebert's description makes me want to see it as soon as possible. Ebert clearly loved movies and the enormous possibilities they held and that shows in all his film writing.
Unfortunately, the book is replete with errors, not of opinion but of fact. I am going to mention just a few:
Shoah:
Filip Muller, a Jew who survived Auschwitz, tells of what happened in the gas chambers. And then, he is asked: "And when the doors were opened?"
Answer: "They fell out. People fell out like blocks of stone, like rocks falling out of a truck."
And then Ebert writes:
The images evoked by his words are unutterably painful. What is remarkable, on reflection, is that Muller is describing an event that neither he or anyone else now alive ever saw.
What does Ebert mean? Is he saying that Muller and everyone else who described what happened in the gas chambers are lying? Surely not. I believe that what Ebert wrote was different than what is printed here and somehow it got scrambled and the meaning was changed.
Ivan the Terrible, Parts I and II:
Ebert discusses the sets used in Carl Dreyer's superb film The Passion of Joan of Arc and compares them to the sets in Ivan:
Eisenstein's sets are incompatibly larger, but often evoke the same look.
Does Ebert mean "incomparably" rather than " incompatibly?" If not, then what does "incompatibly" mean here?
Smiles Of a Summer Night:
The main character's name is Fredrik Egerman, not "Engerman" as given here.
The Spirit of the Beehive:
I haven't seen The Spirit of the Beehive, but surely Ebert is wrong when he describes a scene from the 1931 film of Frankenstein:
The creature comes upon a farmer's young daughter tossing flowers into a pond to watch them float. Perhaps because of censorship, the film cuts directly from this to the monster mournfully carrying the child's drowned body through the village.
I believe it is the child's father who carries her.
Stagecoach:
Ebert writes:
One is reminded of Marlene Dietrich: "I didn't become Shanghai Lil in one night."
The actual quote (from Shanghai Express):
"It took more than one man to change my name to Shanghai Lily."
These are some of the errors I happened to spot without making any effort to find them. I suspect that had Roger Ebert lived to complete this book, much of this would have been corrected.
And that just adds one more item to the long list of reasons that Ebert is so badly missed.
March 31, 2023
As of MARCH 2023 I can only give this book three (3) stars because I’ve made it a practice to only read his essays from films I have seen.
I wanted to read this book because I’ve generally read the previous books and I wanted to read this final book by him.
The Great Movies IV includes the final 62 "Great Movies" entries written by the Pulitzer Prize–winning film critic. The first three editions of the series, The Great Movies I, II and III, each contained 100 essays, and he had been working on IV prior to his death in 2013. It was suggested that other writers could add their own essays to the fourth edition, but Ebert's widow, CHAZ, and the University of Chicago Press ultimately decided to keep the series pure by having it contain only Rogers words.
I agree with Ebert’s widow and the publishers that they should have kept this “series pure by having it contain only Rogers words.”
I’ve stated this before “Ebert is my FAVORITE film critic and I have read a lot of his writings over the years. His writing on cinema is so prodigious that I chose to read ONLY the essays on films I have seen.”
This volume was no different. I only read essays on five films, but they were great. Even at the end Roger Ebert was at the top of his game. I look forward to reading more of his essays when I see more films and I’m happy that he left his work for us.
The five films I read about were:
25th Hour (2002)
The Big Lebowski (1998)
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
Seven (1995)
Superman (1978)
You can read my GOODREADS Reviews of some of his previous volumes.
THE GREAT MOVIES (I) https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... 📚
THE GREAT MOVIES III https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... 📚
I wanted to read this book because I’ve generally read the previous books and I wanted to read this final book by him.
The Great Movies IV includes the final 62 "Great Movies" entries written by the Pulitzer Prize–winning film critic. The first three editions of the series, The Great Movies I, II and III, each contained 100 essays, and he had been working on IV prior to his death in 2013. It was suggested that other writers could add their own essays to the fourth edition, but Ebert's widow, CHAZ, and the University of Chicago Press ultimately decided to keep the series pure by having it contain only Rogers words.
I agree with Ebert’s widow and the publishers that they should have kept this “series pure by having it contain only Rogers words.”
I’ve stated this before “Ebert is my FAVORITE film critic and I have read a lot of his writings over the years. His writing on cinema is so prodigious that I chose to read ONLY the essays on films I have seen.”
This volume was no different. I only read essays on five films, but they were great. Even at the end Roger Ebert was at the top of his game. I look forward to reading more of his essays when I see more films and I’m happy that he left his work for us.
The five films I read about were:
25th Hour (2002)
The Big Lebowski (1998)
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
Seven (1995)
Superman (1978)
You can read my GOODREADS Reviews of some of his previous volumes.
THE GREAT MOVIES (I) https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... 📚
THE GREAT MOVIES III https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... 📚
April 18, 2021
Roger Ebert would have loved the Criterion Channel since a large number of the films listed in this books are ones I've either watched or plan to watch on that channel. For films I've seen, I enjoyed seeing where Ebert's opinions matched or didn't match my own (I think he's wrong about Ivan the Terrible which is stunning and worth more than one watch). It's also nice when he points out things I might have missed or that I should look for in future viewings. Some of his reviews also point me to films I know I wouldn't like. Ebert had an appreciation I don't share for films that sound terribley grim and depressing.
February 6, 2021
Such terse prose. To write clearly you must first think clearly; this is clearly written. Easy to follow but I lingered over each paragraph to digest it. And also to enjoy it. I’m sad it’s over, but at least I took my time.
Reading this me want to watch or rewatch many films, but with his eyes. He saw so much more than I do, and I love seeing that in his writing.
Reading this me want to watch or rewatch many films, but with his eyes. He saw so much more than I do, and I love seeing that in his writing.
April 8, 2018
I do miss Roger's wonderful insights into the history of film. This fourth and last edition of essays about movies taught me a lot and gave me way too many films I need to see! He died before finishing this book so it has fewer essays than the previous three. A treasure for any videophile.
February 24, 2020
Maybe the newswriter that has had the most influence on me as a writer and as a person. (Then again, what pop culture writer/movie critic of a certain age didn’t grow up in Ebert’s shadow?)
This collection is some of the most humane and wonderful writing about film you’ll ever read.
This collection is some of the most humane and wonderful writing about film you’ll ever read.
January 1, 2021
Roger Ebert’s writing on movies is such a delight to read that you don’t even need to have seen the movie in question you to get a sense of his passion, his eye for specific details and his boundless generosity towards the craft of filmmaking.
April 10, 2018
Excellent.
October 5, 2020
Another triumph
Ebert was the premiere film reviewer and his "Great Movies" series shows that. I recommend the who!e four books unreservedly.
Ebert was the premiere film reviewer and his "Great Movies" series shows that. I recommend the who!e four books unreservedly.
January 23, 2022
The final collection of film essays from Roger Ebert, definitely the most obscure "Great Movies" selections.
October 28, 2022
Nothing wrong compared to volume 1, jus not as many movies that I found interesting
March 11, 2023
Delightful and informative - a very good writer and a wonderful guide to the movies
February 2, 2024
#18 of 140 books during 2024
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews