Life Itself (2014)

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

The acting in this movie is really good.

From what I read, it was important to Roger Ebert for the film to show how he looked at the very end. It is definitely difficult and uncomfortable to watch, but that is of course why Ebert insisted that it be included. The problem for me was that they just kept going back to it again and again, and after a certain point, it seemed gratuitous and unnecessary. Yes, it is tough to watch him like that, and I didn't need to be reminded of that throughout the entire movie (it is interspersed with a mostly linear story of Ebert's life and career).I thought the best moments were what was shown during the "Siskel and Ebert" years...maybe someone should make a documentary just about that! There are so many laudatory reviews on IMDb that I felt I should provide a different perspective. It was by no means terrible, but not at all deserving of all the hype it has received.

The life and times of renowned film critic Roger Ebert, as told by the man himself only days before his death. Appropriately, his story fits the tried-and-true redemption arc quite well. Ebert could be a curmudgeon, but that deep-rooted, fiery passion is also what made him so magnetic and thoroughly trustworthy. It also made for plenty of fireworks opposite his more calm-faced, sardonic rival/partner, Gene Siskel. Though much is made of Ebert's late-life metamorphosis after meeting his wife, Chaz, it was this combustible relationship and eventual peace with Siskel that I found most interesting. A pity we never had the chance to hear the other side of that story, as Gene passed more than fifteen years ago. Moving, witty, revealing and meaningful, Ebert's was a life well-lived, full of lessons learned and sacrifices made. Footage of his day-to-day life after losing his jaw to cancer can be hard to watch, but the man himself never flinches. He wanted us to see one reality of the disease, and the lasting impact it leaves behind is harsh and unshakable.

As an aspiring film critic myself, there are quite a few people who I look up to in that profession. Whether it be Jeremy Jahns, The Schmoes, Chris Stuckmann, or Alicia Malone, they all have a different way of spreading their love for movies through words and passion. But the first critic that I ever remembered the name for was Roger Ebert. Just as my review title states, nobody said it better than Roger. He had a way of articulating his words into an informative and entertaining way that made me want to go see the movie and understand what he meant. I mean gosh this man won and Pulitzer Prize and his license plate is 'movies', I mean come on.This documentary gives us an open and personal look at the most famous film critic to ever live. It's directed by acclaimed documentarian Steve James (Hoop Dreams), so you know you're getting a genuinely well thought out film. Unfortunately James had to deal with Ebert's passing a few years back that I'm sure switched the film around a bit. What's great about Life Itself is that Roger says in it that he doesn't want himself to overpower the story of the film. I think he means that sometimes the subject of the film tends to have too much input about what is and isn't shown in the film. But it goes on to show his darker times and his personality that ticked a lot of people off. His relationship with Siskel was average at best and he wasn't afraid to say what he wanted to say whenever he wanted to say it. But I think the more important thing here was his commitment to writing and talking about how beautiful cinema is and always has been.Being from Chicago myself and knowing Ebert was born and raised in Illinois and went on to write for the Sun-Times for more than 40 years, made it even more important to me to see this film and read his reviews. He's one of the few critics where even when I completely disagree with him, I can see where he's coming from and find it hard to argue with the things he says. He predicted Martin Scorsese would become one of the great film directors of all time 10 years before he gave us Raging Bull. Scorsese had quite a few insightful things to say about how much Ebert meant to him, even when he ripped on his movies. I'm glad the film addressed the celebrity that Ebert became and how close actors and people in the film business came to him as his fame grew.As inspirational and devastating as the film can be at times, (talk about tearing up at the end), it's a very spiritual experience. Ebert narrates some of the segments of the film including some that feel like he knows what's coming next. And I think that's why the film impacted me so much, is that Roger really was the star of his own movie, and of course the director, writer, and brought all the actors in. He really did love Life Itself more than movies, the only thing he loved more than movies.+Inspirational, being an aspiring film critic from Chicago +Showed all sides +The Siskel & Ebert relationship was cool to see +Touching and spiritual experience 10/10 (Two Thumbs Up)!

I wish I had half the insights and historical perspectives this wonderful critic and man had. I aspire to write about films but as a dilettante. There are moments of pure joy in one's life. Places where for a few moments we are transported from our mundane existences. When Siskel and Ebert were waxing profound, I forgot about what ailed me. The hard part was that it was only a half hour, but the good thing was that it was only a half hour. This documentary which set out to show a masterful man who was not perfect. He was arrogant at times and inflexible. But who could ask for anything more. This film is a film about love in the face of the barbarity of cancer. It is a glimpse into the working life of a newspaper man. My only criticism is that it would have been nice to see a bit more of the non-Siskel part of the man's professional life. But we are limited to a couple hours, and, of course, there are limitations. This is also about how we face death. As I get older, I wonder if someday soon a doctor will tell me what I don't want to hear. We should not go gentle into that good night. Ebert did not. But he knew when the body that he was given could no longer weather the storms of cancer. I miss both of these men.