Siskel and Ebert review Blue Velvet

i cant believe ebert here..... he actually gave xXx a better rating than blue velvet... this angers me.... alot..... im glad siskel can understand mr lynches movies

I actually agree with Ebert. I saw this film only a few weeks ago, and was excited to learn what it was about. I was neither really enticed to see how things would develop in the film, or interested in seeing Rosallini naked - and here I agree with Ebert - for no particular reason. My disdain may be the result of my general distaste of most anything 'avant garde', but I don't think Lynch was going for that with this movie. I think he was looking for a balance, but, to me, never found one.

I personally think Roger Ebert is a very good film critic and that I really admire his writing style, his way of critique, and the way he formulates his opinions.

That being said, I have to make it absolutely clear that when it comes to this movie, nothing changes the fact that he is completely and utterly WRONG!!!!

no its his opinon

"no its his opinion"

It's one thing to have an opinion that you think a movie sucks.
It's another thing to have your opinion make a false analysis of a film. He clearly missed the point of the film and had no idea what it's intention was, instead attacking the film based solely on Isabelle Rosallini's role. That make him WRONG!!!

no that still makes it his opinon

And his opinion is still wrong!

Quote the great Gene Siskel -

"It's one thing to have an opinion, but if that opinion steps into an error of fact, you have every right to tell that person that his opinion is wrong. For example, if you think the Valachi Papers is better than The Godfather, then you are wrong!"

if someone thinks that then thats their opinon

The worst call of his life..

One of the biggest gaffes of Ebert's career.