Posted on 09/13/2008 8:16:21 PM PDT by samkatz
CHICAGO — Film critic Roger Ebert on Thursday confirmed that a fellow critic yelled at him and whacked him on the knee with a program during a movie screening at the Toronto Film Festival last weekend, but said incident was "blown out of proportion."
"It has been blown out of proportion. It is of little interest," Ebert said in a column posted Thursday on the Web site of the Chicago Sun-Times, where he has been a critic since 1967.
Ebert, who has battled cancer in recent years and was left unable to speak, did not name the other critic involved in the incident. But he said an account published in the New York Daily News that named the other man as rival New York Post movie critic Lou Lumenick was "truthful."
Lumenick did not return an e-mail from The Associated Press after business hours on Thursday.
Saturday's incident began, Ebert said, when he could not see subtitles for the film "Slumlord Millionaire" because the man sitting in front of him was leaning into the aisle.
"In my medical condition I cannot speak, I tapped him lightly on the shoulder, and gestured him to move over a little. He said, 'Don't touch me!' and remained in position. I tapped him lightly again. 'I said — don't touch me!' He leaned further into the aisle, as if making a point of it. I tapped him a third time, and he jumped up and whacked me on the knee with whatever it was," Ebert said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
However, after his foul tirade against Sarah Palin, he did need a good whacking...
No sympathy for this idiot.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
His buddy Siskel died from cancer some years back. It probably scares him alot.
It was a Biatch slap
McCain/Palin's fault
Debbie Schlussel is a horrible film critic.
And then the claws came out...
Debbie Schlussel is a horrible film critic.And Michael Medved is just an irritating wimp.
But she's orders of magnitude better looking.
I don’t want to be negative, but several times I have gone to the movies based on Mr. Medved’s recommendations and I have been disappointed. Maybe we just have different tastes in movies.
At least Medved comes across like an educated man with occasional insight. Not so for DS.
Hey Ebert you a-hole...what part of "don't touch me" don't you understand? Frickin' liberals...think they own the world.
Is “Slumlord Millionaire” about Barry Obama and Tony Rezko?
When his reviews were of movies that were not political I often agreed with him.
Karma, for his unflattering idiot remarks about Sarah Palin. Roger Ebert is a looney idiot.
Waitwaitwait...Ebert needed to read subtitles? Why? He mocked Palin because she isn’t a sophisticated world traveller like him, I wouldn’t think he would need to rely on subtitles.
What can you say about a movie critic like Ebert who see a modern but cinematic uninteresting “Triumph of the Will” and rather than see it for the statist propoganda it give it a thumbs up? He is just pathetic as a movie critic.
Is this where the line forms? Do we bring our own rolled up programs, or are they provided?....
How can you say that?! Medved is no wimp! He stands up for his beliefs all the time. I like him. And most of the time I agree with him. He has a good story. Use to be a huge liberal...but, because he is NOT wimpy, he came into the light, and argues for right, to his fomer lib friends. Some of them are not nice to him any longer.
I LIIIIIIIIIIIKE HIM!
OH OK then. He’s goofy.
How is this even news? Oh, some NY wimp swatted another limp-wrist with a piece of paper—oh me oh my!
Ebert looks like freakin’ E.T.—retire already you waste of protoplasm.
Alright.
You’re not going to agree with any critic all the time. Ebert is one of the best mainstream film critics out there. In terms of knowledge of film history and taste (he’s admittededly declined in the last 10 years).
Sorry, but someone who could not see and understand that “Fahrenheit 911” was propoganda to the extent of being a more mundane 21st century “Triumph of the Will” and propogannda serving as evil a cause, is useless as a movie critic.
And that you DARE list movie history as a credential for such a servant of fascism is outrageous. Clearly he has no sense of movie history of he would have recognized “Fahrenheit 911” for what it was the more mundane offspring of “Triumph of the Will” and “The Battleship Potemkin.” Someone as blind as this to propoganda is a terrible movie critic.
If you want to argue well this was his own blind spot, it is like arguing someone was a fine cop except for that one time five years before retirement when he murdered five people. If you are a cop, you can not have one incident like that. If you are a movie critic, you can not fall sway to propoganda films in the service of evil and maintain your reputation.
I agree about “TOTW” and “The Battleship Potemppkin” which is of course why I kept pointing out that “F911” is mundane. There are example of pathbreaking film making that include views that are acceptable opinion for today.
It is one thing for a critic/film historian to tell you that “Birth of a Nation” was pathbreaking. It is another thing to recommend to readers mundane propoganda like “F911.” The latter shows a fundamental lack of understanding of film history and it means one is not a serious film critic. That is what Ebert has done to himself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.