Critic Review - Chicago Sun-Times

The visual style makes everyone look fresh from the Wax Museum, and all the movie lacks is a lot of day-old gardenias and lilies and roses in the lobby, filling the place with a cloying sweet smell. Nothing more to report today.

October 23, 2004 Full Review Source: Chicago Sun-Times | Comments (18)
Chicago Sun-Times
Top Critic IconTop Critic

Comments

sallmar

Sally Chambers

Sep 4 - 09:39 AM

Cat Stevens

Cat Stevens

Stop eating, Ebert.

Sep 16 - 10:37 AM

Anakin

Drizzt Reznicek

lol

Nov 4 - 05:45 AM

MargotVoguey

Sara Nicholls

What a ludicrous statement! And call THAT a review?! Tut.

Nov 22 - 10:15 AM

ZenFan

Dylan Hair

Ebert, you know how you say there are some films you should revisit?? well, add this to the list. It's great!! This and Blue Velvet need a serious re-review from you

Jun 25 - 09:37 PM

Mac B.

Mac Berg

This, Blue Velvet, Clockwork Orange, and especially Fight Club.

May 19 - 04:59 PM

Shiva the God of Death

Noah F

He actually did 'revisit', for lack of a better term, Fight Club. He still doesn't like it, but he does appreciate why others do.

Mar 10 - 09:24 AM

Mac B.

Mac Berg

And even though it's not old, Kick Ass. That movies was great.

May 19 - 05:01 PM

Veronica

Emily Allison

apah. This review gives no reasoning for any of your statments.

Nov 12 - 07:41 PM

Owen Bailey-Mckay

Owen Bailey-Mckay

1. Harold is obsessed with suicide in the hopes he'll evoke an emotional response from his mother like it did the first time when he accidentally faked his death.

2. His mother is annoyed because she isn't a very good mother, your meant to be appalled by her behavior.

3. Harold does show emotion, around Maude, it shows the connection between them, how he is only close to her. From what you see in the film, Harold has no father figure, no friends yet he is able to connect with this seventy nine year old woman even though they are almost exact opposites.

Learn to understand cinema, or get a real job. FUCK.

Nov 8 - 11:16 PM

Rostislav Plamenov

Rostislav Plamenov

Ebert is irrelevant. Attacks Harold & Maud, Blue Velvet and Clockwork Orange among others, but is a passionate fan of Crash. Where's your taste, Ebert?!

Nov 14 - 03:08 PM

Shiva the God of Death

Noah F

Who made you the decider of good taste?

Mar 10 - 09:23 AM

Kiera

Kiera Maloney

One of the few times I STRONGLY disagree with Mr. Ebert.

Dec 23 - 08:21 PM

Shiva the God of Death

Noah F

I've never seen the film, but the way Ebert describes it, he supports his arguements fully by saying things that do not need supporting: they are their own support.

I don't understand the concept of bashing someone's review if you don't like it. Plus, this review is 40 years old. Goodness.

Mar 10 - 09:25 AM

Ashley Price

Ashley Price

I agree. This review is 40 years old, as old as the film. Obviously, as it was new at the time, Ebert felt no need to agree with others who might have liked it, and had no way of knowing it would one day be considered a cult classic and get a mention in "There's Something About Mary." Maybe it would be worth revisiting, but our tastes don't change much over time.

Jun 23 - 07:01 PM

Charles Kieser

Charles Kieser

I respect Ebert's body of work, but I can't help but feel that he seriously missed the point here.

Mar 18 - 08:22 PM

Moon May

Moon May

Wow... you have no idea what you're talking about. Harold and Maude is an amazingly intricate and artistically driven film.

Check out my review here:
http://iluvvideoaustin.blogspot.com/2012/04/harold-and-maude.html

Jul 21 - 01:35 PM

Shawn Watson

Shawn Watson

Rarely has Mr. Ebert been so wrong...

Aug 7 - 07:16 PM

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