Critic Review - Chicago Sun-Times

It made me feel pity for the actors who worked in it and anger at the director for taking liberties with them.

January 1, 2000 Full Review Source: Chicago Sun-Times | Comments (50)
Chicago Sun-Times
Top Critic IconTop Critic

Comments

ZachtheMovieBuff

Zach Jones

Aug 6 - 08:53 PM

Trekker114

steve metz

Is it just me, or is he inventing reasons to hate it? Did Lynch piss in his coffe?

Aug 17 - 04:06 PM

lecerclerouge

Gerardo Cuervo

Sep 20 - 06:55 PM

JollyG87

Pat Bales

I must have missed something, because I never really found this movie to be funny... not ever!

Sep 23 - 10:01 PM

thug4life1979

jamie boot

i pity fat guys who dedicate their lives to tearing other peoples work down and does nothing creative themselves

Oct 5 - 06:01 PM

magnolianights1990

Eliot Vitalie

wow thug4life, have you accomplished anything or done anything creative in you're life. I didn't think so loser. Ebert's a Pulitzer prize winning journalist, #1 critic in America, and has sold countless great books. You're just a little piss ant who will never do anything. Ever. You're pathetic.

Sep 19 - 10:27 AM

cinephile90

brandi cryer

You're an idiot.

Feb 17 - 02:01 AM

Kassem Jaber

Kassem Jaber

You're a fucking retard

Jul 29 - 09:25 AM

Legion

Travon Smith

I don't know what's more pathetic, people who tear down those who have made great and admiring feats or those who use people who have made great and admiring feats as a way to belittle others.

Dec 2 - 02:17 AM

i1045

Austin Kimmel

WOW! EVERT WON A PRIZE?!?! who fucking cares buddy. Looks like you have too much red, white, and blue cock up your ass.

Feb 29 - 07:36 AM

i1045

Austin Kimmel

WOW! EBERT WON A PRIZE?!?! who fucking cares buddy. Prizes a device put there to tell you what to like. I'd like to make that decision for myself, thanks. Ebert is a cunt.

Feb 29 - 07:38 AM

w@velength

In Your Dreams

Pulitzer Prizes are for legitimate accomplishments and volumes of tangible work Austin, not like the third place ribbon you got for being a bench-warmer at the Special Olympics.

Sep 10 - 05:41 AM

Rich M.

Rich M.

BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP

Sorry, that's my pissant detector. Nice job, you condescending fuck; now have a taste of your own medicine.

Apr 5 - 02:34 PM

ybrik222

Connor NO COMMENT

thug4life1979 is wrong, but you're an ass.

May 5 - 08:19 AM

Hamed Shm

Hamed Shm

Yeah i see how wide-thinker he is ;)

Jun 16 - 06:16 AM

tyler d.

tyler devos

yeah ebert is wrong here. but to suggest that any Lynch film does not possess some sort of diabolical sense of humor is majorly naive. and thug4life, see beyond the valley of the dolls... ebert wrote it and it manages to be crazy, disturbing, hilarious, and totally kick ***. this said, ebert ****s all over lynch's best works enough that i think we can assume he's got some sort of personal grudge towards lynch's work.

Nov 18 - 01:02 PM

bosniac

N. K.

idiot

Nov 26 - 04:34 AM

borntolose52

Isaac Baranoff

In Ebert's mind, "xXx" is a better film than "Blue Velvet". Overpaid wanker.

Dec 1 - 09:03 AM

AlexDeLargeisHere

Harold Warren

His star ratings are relative not absolute!

Apr 17 - 03:52 AM

Sheb

Neboj?a Jarić

who the hell named this guy the best critic?! i have disagreed with him many times, but this is too much!

Jan 8 - 02:25 PM

Ragalar

Joey Z

Ebert's a great critic, but I've never understood this review.

Jan 12 - 08:14 AM

Ezekiel__25:17__

Derek Fleek

This being said from the guy who thought that Cop and a Half was a good movie. Sorry Ebert, but sometimes you lose all your touch...

May 25 - 08:08 PM

Ed Wood

James Bevins

Damn Ebert, when you miss, you miss BIG.

Awful review.

Jul 19 - 03:18 PM

Snacky

Thomas Ryan

He's trying to view it as a satire and a comedy, so he got confused. He must of thought that this was some kind of comedy act. He doesn't seem to like serious sexual or violent acts being acted out in the way they do. See: Fight Club, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Die Hard. He gave bad reviews for all of those.

Sep 20 - 03:08 PM

Andrew B.

That Bacon

On the DVD, Ebert cites the "sexist" (what?) role of Rossellini as being one of the reasons he dislikes it. Are directs not supposed to show woman being abused anymore?

Jan 11 - 02:20 PM

thefreshman

Patrick Feeney

Actually, Ebert loved Mulholland Drive:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20011012/REVIEWS/110120304/1023

I personally think his opinion on Blue Velvet was fairly accurate. The film could have been a whole lot better had Rosellini and Mclaughlin's relationship been explored more. Instead, we didn't get any of that.
Eraserhead and Mulholland Drive beat this one by a long yard. I mean, it isn't terrible, but it's far from greatness.

Aug 25 - 07:03 PM

Josh G.

imgonnaget STABBED

I agree. This film isn't as nearly transcendent as promised at the beginning; in fact, the progression of the film feels conventional at times, especially near the end. Many questions were only half answered, much of the symbolism didn't match up with the rest of the film, and the abrupt jumps from surrealism to stark reality (however technically brilliant) detract from an overall establishing mood for the film. That's not to say it doesn't have its merits though: It has some great performances and directing bravado by Lynch. Ebert got a lot right.

Jun 12 - 11:40 PM

Jack Pearce

Jack Pearce

Wrong wrong wrong.

Oct 28 - 01:54 AM

Chris Vibert

Chris Vibert

and you think mulholland drive added up?

Jul 5 - 08:03 PM

SmokingAce

Blake Jennings

Ebert's a really great critic. Although I don't agree with him, that doesn't mean he sucks. Everybody has one movie they hate that everybody else likes. Cough Gladiator Cough.

Oct 11 - 09:46 PM

Jeff D.

Jeff Dotson

And Brazil.

Jan 12 - 09:37 AM

Quadzilla99

Aaron Yovanovits

I hated this movie as well so I'll defend Ebert. Lynch has a habit of making movies with extremely myopic plots. I read somewhere when questioned he stated that in certain movies he himself couldn't even explain them, which says about all you need to know.

Apr 22 - 04:14 AM

Bye bye

Steven Bailey

Agreed completely with this review. I'm laughing my $#% off at all the little pissed off fanboys crying that this movie got a bad review.

Jul 10 - 01:47 AM

Weevol  T.

Weevol Tiddums

blue velvet has fanboys?

Nov 27 - 11:16 AM

Ken

Kenneth W.

Of course not. No fans here. Just...91% of the reviewers on Rotten tomatoes, 88% of the RT community...

Apr 21 - 10:57 PM

w@velength

In Your Dreams

Mainstream fanboys.

Sep 10 - 05:45 AM

DoctorXeno

Jonathan Nono

David Lynch is my favorite director (or second, after John Woo), Blue Velvet helped me appreciate cinema and I consider it an all-time masterpiece.

I still have no problems with Ebert's review.

Jul 12 - 01:59 AM

Spencer B.

Spencer Bowers

Dismissing a true masterpiece but celebrating junk like Land of the Lost and Paul Blart. Ebert, I hope you're happy.

Jan 4 - 06:10 PM

Leo Winters

Leo Winters

mr.Ebert, you are a whiny baby if I ever saw one, any film that involves some kind of abuse towards women, whether it's Blue Velvet, Clockwork Orange or Straw Dogs, you immediately dismiss as violent, senseless pornography. While in fact, these directors just have the balls to shed light on the things people would rather pretend didn't exist. Get off your high horse.

Aug 3 - 07:32 AM

Andrew Cassar

Andrew Cassar

He liked Irreversible. He was able to find a deeper meaning to the abuse in that movie (which if you didn't know is famous for it's brutal and unforgiving scenes of violence)where as he couldn't in this.

I haven't seen either but because a movie brings up a taboo topic and discusses it does not mean it shows any true insight or actual reasoning to it, in fact, I strongly believe some use it as a cheap ploy.

Apr 2 - 05:24 PM

SolarisDeschain

Andrew Cook

Roger Ebert gives Blue Velvet one star, but he gives Irreversible three. Am I the only one thinking something isn't quite right in that?

Sep 3 - 02:13 AM

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile