Editing Roger Ebert (section)

==Preferences==
===Favorites===
In an essay looking back at his first 25 years as a film critic, Ebert wrote:

{{Blockquote |text=
If I had to make a generalization, I would say that many of my favorite movies are about Good People ... ''[[Casablanca (film)|Casablanca]]'' is about people who do the right thing. ''[[The Third Man]]'' is about people who do the right thing and can never speak to one another as a result ... Not all good movies are about Good People. I also like movies about bad people who have a sense of humor. [[Orson Welles]], who does not play either of the good people in ''The Third Man'', has such a winning way, such witty dialogue, that for a scene or two we almost forgive him his crimes. Henry Hill, the hero of ''[[Goodfellas]]'', is not a good fella, but he has the ability to be honest with us about why he enjoyed being bad. He is not a hypocrite.}}

{{Blockquote |text=Of the other movies I love, some are simply about the joy of physical movement. When [[Gene Kelly]] splashes through ''[[Singin' in the Rain]]'', when [[Judy Garland]] follows the yellow brick road, when [[Fred Astaire]] dances on the ceiling, when [[John Wayne]] puts the reins in his teeth and gallops across the mountain meadow, there is a purity and joy that cannot be resisted. In ''[[Equinox Flower]]'', a Japanese film by the old master [[Yasujirō Ozu]], there is this sequence of shots: A room with a red teapot in the foreground. Another view of the room. The mother folding clothes. A shot down a corridor with a mother crossing it at an angle, and then a daughter crossing at the back. A reverse shot in the hallway as the arriving father is greeted by the mother and daughter. A shot as the father leaves the frame, then the mother, then the daughter. A shot as the mother and father enter the room, as in the background the daughter picks up the red pot and leaves the frame. This sequence of timed movement and cutting is as perfect as any music ever written, any dance, any poem.<ref name=Twenty-Five>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=April 11, 1992 |title=Reflections after 25 years at the movies |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]]| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/reflections-after-25-years-at-the-movies}}</ref>}}

Ebert credits film historian [[Donald Richie]] and the [[Hawaii International Film Festival]] for introducing him to Asian cinema through Richie's invitation to join him on the jury of the festival in 1983, which quickly became a favorite of his and would frequently attend along with Richie, lending their support to validate the festival's status as a "festival of record".<ref>{{cite web |last1=Ebert |first1=Roger |title=In memory of Donald Richie |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/far-flung-correspondents/in-memory-of-donald-richie |website=rogerebert.com |date=21 March 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Sartin |first1=Hank |title=Mahalo Roger!: The Hawaii International Film Festival pays tribute to Roger |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/chazs-blog/mahalo-roger-the-hawaiian-international-film-festival-pays-tribute-to-roger |date=11 October 2013}}</ref> He lamented the decline of campus film societies: "There was once a time when young people made it their business to catch up on the best works by the best directors, but the death of film societies and repertory theaters put an end to that, and for today's younger filmgoers, these are not well-known names: [[Luis Buñuel| Buñuel]], [[Federico Fellini| Fellini]], [[Ingmar Bergman| Bergman]], [[John Ford| Ford]], [[Akira Kurosawa| Kurosawa]], [[Satyajit Ray| Ray]], [[Jean Renoir| Renoir]], [[David Lean|  Lean]], [[Robert Bresson| Bresson]], [[Billy Wilder| Wilder]], [[Orson Welles| Welles]]. Most people still know who [[Alfred Hitchcock| Hitchcock]] was, I guess."<ref name=Twenty-Five/>

Ebert argued for the aesthetic values of [[black-and-white photography]] and against colorization, writing:

{{Blockquote|Black-and-white movies present the deliberate absence of color. This makes them less realistic than color films (for the real world is in color). They are more dreamlike, more pure, composed of shapes and forms and movements and light and shadow. Color films can simply be illuminated. Black-and-white films have to be lighted ... Black and white is a legitimate and beautiful artistic choice in motion pictures, creating feelings and effects that cannot be obtained any other way.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=1989 |title=Why I Love Black and White |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]]}}</ref>}}

He wrote: "Black-and-white (or, more accurately, silver-and-white) creates a mysterious dream state, a simpler world of form and gesture. Most people do not agree with me. They like color and think a black-and-white film is missing something. Try this. If you have wedding photographs of your parents and grandparents, chances are your parents are in color and your grandparents are in black and white. Put the two photographs side by side and consider them honestly. Your grandparents look timeless. Your parents look goofy.

The next time you buy film for your camera, buy a roll of black-and-white. Go outside at dusk, when the daylight is diffused. Stand on the side of the house away from the sunset. Shoot some natural-light closeups of a friend. Have the pictures printed big, at least 5 x 7. Ask yourself if this friend, who has always looked ordinary in every color photograph you’ve ever taken, does not suddenly, in black and white, somehow take on an aura of mystery. The same thing happens in the movies."<ref name=Twenty-Five/>

Ebert championed animation, particularly the films of [[Hayao Miyazaki]] and [[Isao Takahata]].<ref>{{cite news |last1=Ebert |first1=Roger |title=Japanese animation unleashes the mind |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/japanese-animation-unleashes-the-mind |access-date=February 28, 2023 |work=Chicago Sun-Times |date=October 7, 1999 |language=en |archive-date=August 15, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230815114910/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/japanese-animation-unleashes-the-mind |url-status=live }}</ref> In his review of Miyazaki's ''[[Princess Mononoke]]'', he wrote: "I go to the movies for many reasons. Here is one of them. I want to see wondrous sights not available in the real world, in stories where myth and dreams are set free to play. Animation opens that possibility, because it is freed from gravity and the chains of the possible. Realistic films show the physical world; animation shows its essence. Animated films are not copies of 'real movies,' are not shadows of reality, but create a new existence in their own right."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=October 29, 1999 |title=Princess Mononoke |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/princess-mononoke-1999 |access-date=August 4, 2022 |archive-date=March 6, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160306121035/http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/princess-mononoke-1999 |url-status=live }}</ref> He concluded his review of ''[[Ratatouille (film)|Ratatouille]]'' by writing: "Every time an animated film is successful, you have to read all over again about how animation isn't 'just for children' but 'for the whole family,' and 'even for adults going on their own.' No kidding!"<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=August 30, 2007 |title=Waiter, there's a rat in my soup |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/ratatouille-2007 |access-date=August 4, 2022 |archive-date=October 13, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131013023850/http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/ratatouille-2007 |url-status=live }}</ref>

Ebert championed documentaries, notably [[Errol Morris]]'s ''[[Gates of Heaven]]'': "They say you can make a great documentary about anything, as long as you see it well enough and truly, and this film proves it. ''Gates of Heaven'', which has no connection to the unfortunate ''[[Heaven's Gate (film)|Heaven's Gate]]'', is about a couple of pet cemeteries and their owners. It was filmed in Southern California, so of course we expect a sardonic look at the peculiarities of the Moonbeam State. But then ''Gates of Heaven'' grows ever so much more complex and frightening, until at the end it is about such large issues as love, immortality, failure, and the dogged elusiveness of the American Dream."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=January 1, 1978 |title=Gates of Heaven |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/gates-of-heaven-1978 |access-date=April 19, 2023 |archive-date=April 19, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230419192139/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/gates-of-heaven-1978 |url-status=live }}</ref> Morris credited Ebert's review with putting him on the map.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Errol Morris On Ebert & Siskel |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Zj_bAlyB0 |website=YouTube | date=July 21, 2011 |access-date=October 14, 2023 |archive-date=October 22, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231022003223/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Zj_bAlyB0 |url-status=live }}</ref> He championed [[Michael Apted]]'s [[Up (film series)|''Up'' films]], calling them "an inspired, even noble use of the medium."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=1998 |title=The Up Documentaries |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-the-up-documentaries-1985 |access-date=April 22, 2023 |archive-date=April 22, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230422042138/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-the-up-documentaries-1985 |url-status=live }}</ref> Ebert concluded his review of ''[[Hoop Dreams]]'' by writing: "Many filmgoers are reluctant to see documentaries, for reasons I've never understood; the good ones are frequently more absorbing and entertaining than fiction. ''Hoop Dreams'', however, is not only documentary. It is also poetry and prose, muckraking and expose, journalism and polemic. It is one of the great moviegoing experiences of my lifetime."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=October 21, 1994 |title=Hoop Dreams |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/hoop-dreams-1994 |access-date=April 19, 2023 |archive-date=April 19, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230419192143/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/hoop-dreams-1994 |url-status=live }}</ref>{{quote box|quoted = 1|If a movie can illuminate the lives of other people who share this planet with us and show us not only how different they are but, how even so, they share the same dreams and hurts, then it deserves to be called great.|source=— Ebert, 1986<ref>{{cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=October 25, 1986 |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/A-love-story-forged-in-hell |title=Sid and Nancy |newspaper=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |access-date=May 31, 2020 |via=[[RogerEbert.com]] |archive-date=April 5, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200405191646/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/A-love-story-forged-in-hell |url-status=live }}</ref>|width=25%|align=right|style=padding:8px;|border=1px}}

Ebert said that his favorite film was ''[[Citizen Kane]]'', joking, "That's the official answer," although he preferred to emphasize it as "the most important" film. He said seeing ''The Third Man'' cemented his love of cinema: "This movie is on the altar of my love for the cinema. I saw it for the first time in a little fleabox of a theater on the Left Bank in Paris, in 1962, during my first $5 a day trip to Europe. It was so sad, so beautiful, so romantic, that it became at once a part of my own memories — as if it had happened to me."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=April 1, 1991 |title=Ten Greatest Films of All Time |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/ten-greatest-films-of-all-time |access-date=July 30, 2022 |archive-date=June 5, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200605174332/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/ten-greatest-films-of-all-time |url-status=live }}</ref> He implied that his real favorite film was ''[[La Dolce Vita]]''.<ref name="FavoriteFilm">{{cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=September 4, 2008 |title="What's your favorite movie?" |work=Chicago Sun-Times |url=http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/09/whats_your_favorite_movie.html |url-status=dead |access-date=October 17, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080905150448/http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/09/whats_your_favorite_movie.html |archive-date=September 5, 2008}}</ref>

His favorite actor was [[Robert Mitchum]] and his favorite actress was [[Ingrid Bergman]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tv.com/roger-ebert/person/81392/biography.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120517061609/http://www.tv.com/roger-ebert/person/81392/biography.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=May 17, 2012 |title=Biography page for Ebert at |publisher=Tv.com |access-date=October 17, 2009}}</ref> He named [[Buster Keaton]], Yasujirō Ozu, [[Robert Altman]], [[Werner Herzog]] and [[Martin Scorsese]] as his favorite directors.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/meet-a-critic-roger-ebert/ |title=Meet a Critic: Roger Ebert |website=[[Rotten Tomatoes]] |access-date=January 3, 2017 |archive-date=August 30, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170830123412/http://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/meet-a-critic-roger-ebert/ |url-status=live }}</ref> He expressed his distaste for "top-10" lists, and all movie lists in general, but did make an annual list of the year's best films, joking that film critics are "required by unwritten law" to do so. He also contributed an all-time top-10 list for the decennial ''[[Sight and Sound|Sight & Sound]]'' Critics' poll in 1982, 1992, 2002 and 2012. In 1982, he chose, alphabetically, ''[[2001: A Space Odyssey]]'', ''[[Aguirre, the Wrath of God]]'', ''[[Bonnie and Clyde (film)|Bonnie and Clyde]]'', ''[[Casablanca (film)|Casablanca]]'', ''Citizen Kane'', ''La Dolce Vita'', ''[[Notorious (1946 film)|Notorious]]'', ''[[Persona (1966 film)|Persona]]'', ''[[Taxi Driver]]'' and ''The Third Man''. In 2012, he chose ''2001: A Space Odyssey'', ''Aguirre, the Wrath of God'', ''[[Apocalypse Now]]'', ''Citizen Kane'', ''La Dolce Vita'', ''[[The General (1926 film)|The General]]'', ''[[Raging Bull]]'', ''[[Tokyo Story]]'', ''[[The Tree of Life (film)|The Tree of Life]]'' and ''[[Vertigo (film)|Vertigo]]''.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://explore.bfi.org.uk/sightandsoundpolls/2012/voter/142 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120819021224/http://explore.bfi.org.uk/sightandsoundpolls/2012/voter/142 |url-status=dead |archive-date=August 19, 2012 |title=The Greatest Films Poll |author=Roger Ebert |publisher=BFI |date=September 2012 |access-date=September 12, 2012}}</ref> Several of the contributors to Ebert's website participated in a video tribute to him, featuring films that made his ''Sight & Sound'' list in 1982 and 2012.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://vimeo.com/42638994?embedded=true&source=vimeo_logo&owner=6994428 |title=The Sight and Sound Film Poll: An International Tribute to Roger Ebert and His Favorite Films |last=Lee |first=Kevin B. |date=2013 |website=Vimeo.com |access-date=February 8, 2023 |archive-date=February 6, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230206234048/https://vimeo.com/42638994?embedded=true&source=vimeo_logo&owner=6994428 |url-status=live }}</ref>

===Best films of the year===
Ebert made annual "ten best lists" from 1967 to 2012.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041215/COMMENTARY/41215001/1023 |work=Chicago Sun-Times |title=Ebert's 10 Best Lists: 1967–present |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060908200137/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20041215%2FCOMMENTARY%2F41215001%2F1023 |archive-date=September 8, 2006}}</ref> His choices for best film of the year were:
{{div col|colwidth=20em}}
* 1967: ''[[Bonnie and Clyde (film)|Bonnie and Clyde]]''
* 1968: ''[[The Battle of Algiers]]''
* 1969: ''[[Z (1969 film)|Z]]''
* 1970: ''[[Five Easy Pieces]]''
* 1971: ''[[The Last Picture Show]]''
* 1972: ''[[The Godfather]]''
* 1973: ''[[Cries and Whispers]]''
* 1974: ''[[Scenes from a Marriage]]''
* 1975: ''[[Nashville (film)|Nashville]]''
* 1976: ''[[Small Change (film)|Small Change]]''
* 1977: ''[[3 Women]]''
* 1978: ''[[An Unmarried Woman]]''
* 1979: ''[[Apocalypse Now]]''
* 1980: ''[[The Black Stallion (film)|The Black Stallion]]''
* 1981: ''[[My Dinner with Andre]]''
* 1982: ''[[Sophie's Choice (film)|Sophie's Choice]]''
* 1983: ''[[The Right Stuff (film)|The Right Stuff]]''
* 1984: ''[[Amadeus (film)|Amadeus]]''
* 1985: ''[[The Color Purple (1985 film)|The Color Purple]]''
* 1986: ''[[Platoon (film)|Platoon]]''
* 1987: ''[[House of Games]]''
* 1988: ''[[Mississippi Burning]]''
* 1989: ''[[Do the Right Thing]]''
* 1990: ''[[Goodfellas]]''
* 1991: ''[[JFK (film)|JFK]]''
* 1992: ''[[Malcolm X (1992 film)|Malcolm X]]''
* 1993: ''[[Schindler's List]]''
* 1994: ''[[Hoop Dreams]]''
* 1995: ''[[Leaving Las Vegas]]''
* 1996: ''[[Fargo (1996 film)|Fargo]]''
* 1997: ''[[Eve's Bayou]]''
* 1998: ''[[Dark City (1998 film)|Dark City]]''
* 1999: ''[[Being John Malkovich]]''
* 2000: ''[[Almost Famous]]''
* 2001: ''[[Monster's Ball]]''
* 2002: ''[[Minority Report (film)|Minority Report]]''
* 2003: ''[[Monster (2003 film)|Monster]]''
* 2004: ''[[Million Dollar Baby]]''
* 2005: ''[[Crash (2004 film)|Crash]]''
* 2006: ''[[Pan's Labyrinth]]''
* 2007: ''[[Juno (film)|Juno]]''
* 2008: ''[[Synecdoche, New York]]''
* 2009: ''[[The Hurt Locker]]''
* 2010: ''[[The Social Network]]''
* 2011: ''[[A Separation]]''
* 2012: ''[[Argo (2012 film)|Argo]]''
{{div col end}}

Ebert revisited and sometimes revised his opinions. After ranking ''[[E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial]]'' third on his 1982 list, it was the only movie from that year to appear on his later "Best Films of the 1980s" list (where it also ranked third).<ref name = ListArchive>{{cite web |url=http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~ejohnson/critics/ebert.html#best80s |title=Roger Ebert's Top Ten Lists, 1967-2006 |website=Eric C. Johnson's archive |publisher=[[California Institute of Technology]] |access-date=January 2, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071231063216/http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~ejohnson/critics/ebert.html#best80s |archive-date=December 31, 2007 |url-status=dead}}</ref> He made similar reevaluations of ''[[Raiders of the Lost Ark]]'' (1981) and ''[[Ran (film)|Ran]]'' (1985).<ref name = ListArchive/> The ''[[Three Colours trilogy]]'' (''[[Three Colors: Blue|Blue]]'' (1993), ''[[Three Colors: White|White]]'' (1994), and ''[[Three Colors: Red|Red]]'' (also 1994), and ''[[Pulp Fiction]]'' (1994) originally ranked second and third on Ebert's 1994 list; both were included on his "Best Films of the 1990s" list, but their order had reversed.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.innermind.com/misc/s_e_top.htm |title=Siskel and Ebert Top Ten Lists (1969–1998) |website=innermind.com |access-date=November 11, 2011 |archive-date=November 8, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201108124328/http://www.innermind.com/misc/s_e_top.htm |url-status=live }}</ref>

In 2006, Ebert noted his own "tendency to place what I now consider the year's best film in second place, perhaps because I was trying to make some kind of point with my top pick,"<ref>{{cite book |last=Ebert |first=Roger |title=Awake in the Dark |url=https://archive.org/details/awakedarkbestrog00eber |url-access=limited |publisher=University of Chicago Press |date=2006 |page=[https://archive.org/details/awakedarkbestrog00eber/page/n139 103]}}</ref> adding, "In 1968, I should have ranked ''[[2001: A Space Odyssey|2001]]'' above ''The Battle of Algiers''. In 1971, ''[[McCabe & Mrs. Miller]]'' was better than ''The Last Picture Show''. In 1974, ''[[Chinatown (1974 film)|Chinatown]]'' was probably better, in a different way, than ''Scenes from a Marriage''. In 1976, how could I rank ''Small Change'' above ''[[Taxi Driver]]''? In 1978, I would put ''[[Days of Heaven]]'' above ''An Unmarried Woman''. And in 1980, of course, ''[[Raging Bull]]'' was a better film than ''The Black Stallion''&nbsp;... although I later chose ''Raging Bull'' as the best film of the entire decade of the 1980s, it was only the second-best film of 1980&nbsp;... am I the same person I was in 1968, 1971, or 1980? I hope not."

Ebert's ten best lists resumed in 2014, the first full year after his death, as a [[Borda count]] system by his writers.

{{div col|colwidth=20em}}
* 2014: ''[[Under the Skin (2013 film)|Under the Skin]]''
* 2015: ''[[Mad Max: Fury Road]]''
* 2016: ''[[Moonlight (2016 film)|Moonlight]]''
* 2017: ''[[Lady Bird (film)|Lady Bird]]''
* 2018: ''[[Roma (2018 film)|Roma]]''
* 2019: ''[[The Irishman]]''
* 2020: ''[[Lovers Rock (2020 film)|Lovers Rock]]''
* 2021: ''[[The Power of the Dog (film)|The Power of the Dog]]''
* 2022: ''[[The Banshees of Inisherin]]''
* 2023: ''[[Killers of the Flower Moon (film)|Killers of the Flower Moon]]''
* 2024: ''[[The Brutalist]]''
{{div col end}}

===Best films of the decade===
Ebert compiled "best of the decade" movie lists in the 2000s for the 1970s to the 2000s, thereby helping provide an overview of his critical preferences. Only three films for this listing were named by Ebert as the best film of the year, ''Five Easy Pieces'' (1970), ''Hoop Dreams'' (1994), and ''Synecdoche, New York'' (2008).  In 2019, the editors of RogerEbert.com continued the tradition as a joint review of the RogerEbert.com writers.

* ''[[Five Easy Pieces]]'' (1970s)<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-five-easy-pieces-1970|title=Five Easy Pieces|work=RogerEbert.com|date=March 16, 2003|access-date=March 22, 2023|archive-date=July 28, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728051330/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-five-easy-pieces-1970|url-status=live}}</ref>
* ''[[Raging Bull]]'' (1980s)<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.rogerebert.com/chazs-blog/rogers-top-ten-lists-best-films-of-the-1980s|title=Roger's Top Ten Lists: Best Films of the 1980s|date=April 19, 2022|access-date=March 22, 2023|archive-date=March 23, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230323002708/https://www.rogerebert.com/chazs-blog/rogers-top-ten-lists-best-films-of-the-1980s|url-status=live}}</ref>
* ''[[Hoop Dreams]]'' (1990s)<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/the-best-10-movies-of-1990s|title=The Best 10 Movies of 1990s|work=RogerEbert.com|date=February 23, 2000|access-date=March 22, 2023|archive-date=March 9, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230309150029/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/the-best-10-movies-of-1990s|url-status=live}}</ref>
* ''[[Synecdoche, New York]]'' (2000s)<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/the-best-films-of-the-decade|title=The best films of the decade|work=RoberEbert.com|date=December 30, 2009|access-date=March 22, 2023|archive-date=April 13, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230413024222/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/the-best-films-of-the-decade|url-status=live}}</ref>
* ''[[The Tree of Life (film)|The Tree of Life]]'' (2010s) <REF> {{cite web|url=https://www.rogerebert.com/features/the-best-films-of-the-2010s|work=RogerEbert.com|date=November 3, 2019|accessdate=December 17, 2024 |title=The Best Films of the 2010s &#124; Features &#124; Roger Ebert }} </REF>

===Genres and content===
Ebert was often critical of the [[Motion Picture Association of America film rating system]] (MPAA). His main arguments were that they were too strict on sex and profanity, too lenient on violence, secretive with their guidelines, inconsistent in applying them and not willing to consider the wider context and meaning of the film.<ref name="uglyreality">{{cite web |last=Ebert |first=Roger |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/ugly-reality-in-movie-ratings |title=Ugly reality in movie ratings |publisher=[[RogerEbert.com]] |date=September 24, 2000 |access-date=May 1, 2018 |archive-date=May 1, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180501225754/https://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/ugly-reality-in-movie-ratings |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703766704576009343432436296 |title=Getting Real About Movie Ratings |newspaper=[[The Wall Street Journal]] |date=December 11, 2010 |access-date=April 5, 2013 |archive-date=July 6, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150706203750/http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703766704576009343432436296 |url-status=live }}</ref> He advocated replacing the [[NC-17]] rating with separate ratings for pornographic and nonpornographic adult films.<ref name="uglyreality"/> He praised ''[[This Film Is Not Yet Rated|This Film is Not Yet Rated]]'', a documentary critiquing the MPAA, adding that their rules are "[[Franz Kafka|Kafkaesque]]."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=September 14, 2006 |title=How do the ratings rate? |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/this-film-is-not-yet-rated-2006 |access-date=April 19, 2023 |archive-date=April 19, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230419192140/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/this-film-is-not-yet-rated-2006 |url-status=live }}</ref> He signed off on his review of ''[[Almost Famous]]'' by asking, "Why did they give an R rating to a movie so perfect for teenagers?"<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=September 15, 2000 |title=Almost Famous |work=[[Chicago Sun Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/almost-famous-2000 |access-date=February 7, 2023 |archive-date=February 24, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230224142345/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/almost-famous-2000 |url-status=live }}</ref>

Ebert also frequently lamented that cinemas outside major cities are "booked by computer from Hollywood with no regard for local tastes," making high-quality independent and foreign films virtually unavailable to most American moviegoers.<ref>{{cite web |first=Roger |last=Ebert |url=http://www.suntimes.com/output/oscars/ebert27.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040604184449/http://www.suntimes.com/output/oscars/ebert27.html |archive-date=June 4, 2004 |date=June 4, 2004 |title=They got it right |website=[[Chicago Sun-Times]]}}</ref>

He wrote that "I've always preferred generic approach to film criticism; I ask myself how good a movie is of its type."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=December 26, 1973 |title=The Exorcist |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-exorcist-1973 |access-date=August 4, 2022 |archive-date=November 2, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191102153840/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-exorcist-1973 |url-status=live }}</ref> 
He gave ''[[Halloween (1978 film)|Halloween]]'' four stars: "Seeing it, I was reminded of the favorable review I gave a few years ago to ''Last House on the Left'', another really terrifying thriller. Readers wrote to ask how I could possibly support such a movie. But I wasn't supporting it so much as describing it: You don't want to be scared? Don't see it. Credit must be paid to directors who want to really frighten us, to make a good thriller when quite possibly a bad one would have made as much money. Hitchcock is acknowledged as a master of suspense; it's hypocrisy to disapprove of other directors in the same genre who want to scare us too."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=October 31, 1978 |title=Halloween |work=[[Chicago Sun Times]]}}</ref>

Ebert did not believe in grading children's movies on a curve, as he thought children were smarter than given credit for and deserved quality entertainment. He began his review of ''[[Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory]]'': "Kids are not stupid. They are among the sharpest, cleverest, most eagle-eyed creatures on God's green Earth, and very little escapes their notice. You may not have observed that your neighbor is still using his snow-tires in mid-July, but every four-year-old on the block has, and kids pay the same attention when they go to the movies. They don't miss a thing, and have an instinctive contempt for shoddy and shabby work. I make this observation because nine out of ten kids' movies are stupid, witless and display contempt for their audiences. Is that all parents want from kids' movies? That they not have anything bad in them? Shouldn't they have something good in them — some life, imagination, fantasy, inventiveness, something to tickle the imagination? If a movie isn't going to do your kids any good, why let them watch it? Just to kill a Saturday afternoon? That shows a subtle contempt for a child's mind, I think." He went on to say he thought ''Willy Wonka'' was the best movie of its kind since ''[[The Wizard of Oz (1939 film)|The Wizard of Oz]]''.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=1971 |title=Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/willy-wonka-and-the-chocolate-factory-1971 |access-date=April 22, 2023 |archive-date=September 30, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230930233251/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/willy-wonka-and-the-chocolate-factory-1971 |url-status=live }}</ref>

Ebert tried not to judge a film on its ideology. Reviewing ''[[Apocalypse Now]]'', he writes: "I am not particularly interested in the 'ideas' in Coppola's film...Like all great works of art about war, ''Apocalypse Now'' essentially contains only one idea or message, the not-especially-enlightening observation that war is hell. We do not go to see Coppola's movie for that insight — something Coppola, but not some of his critics, knows well. Coppola also well knows (and demonstrated in ''The Godfather'' films) that movies aren't especially good at dealing with abstract ideas — for those you'd be better off turning to the written word — but they are superb for presenting moods and feelings, the look of a battle, the expression on a face, the mood of a country. ''Apocalypse Now'' achieves greatness not by analyzing our 'experience in Vietnam,' but by re-creating, in characters and images, something of that experience."<ref>{{cite news| last=Ebert| first=Roger| date=June 1, 1979| title=Apocalypse Now| work=Chicago Sun-Times| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/apocalypse-now-1979| access-date=April 27, 2024| archive-date=November 14, 2020| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201114145551/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/apocalypse-now-1979| url-status=live}}</ref> Ebert commented on films using his [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] upbringing as a point of reference,<ref name=ChicagoMag>{{cite magazine |first=Carol |last=Felsenthal |date=December 2005 |url=http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/December-2005/A-Life-in-the-Movies/index.php?cp=1&si=0 |title=A Life In The Movies |magazine=[[Chicago Magazine]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110823172045/http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/December-2005/A-Life-in-the-Movies/index.php?cp=1&si=0 |archive-date=August 23, 2011 |access-date=April 6, 2013}}</ref> and was critical of films he believed were grossly ignorant of or insulting to Catholicism, such as ''[[Stigmata (film)|Stigmata]]'' (1999)<ref>{{cite web |first=Roger |last=Ebert |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/stigmata-1999 |title=Stigmata |date=January 1, 1999 |newspaper=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |via=[[RogerEbert.com]] |access-date=April 23, 2022 |archive-date=June 9, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220609203034/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/stigmata-1999 |url-status=live }}</ref> and ''[[Priest (1994 film)|Priest]]'' (1994).<ref>{{cite news |first=Roger |last=Ebert |url=http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19950407/REVIEWS/504070308/1023 |title=Priest |newspaper=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |date=April 7, 1995 |access-date=July 24, 2011 |archive-date=November 26, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101126181317/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19950407/REVIEWS/504070308/1023 |url-status=dead}}</ref> He also gave favorable reviews of controversial films relating to [[Jesus Christ]] or Catholicism, including ''[[The Last Temptation of Christ (film)|The Last Temptation of Christ]]'' (1988),<ref>{{cite news| last=Ebert| first=Roger| date=August 12, 1988| title=The Last Temptation of Christ| work=Chicago Sun-Times| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-last-temptation-of-christ-1998| access-date=May 3, 2024| archive-date=February 23, 2024| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240223153806/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-last-temptation-of-christ-1998| url-status=live}}</ref> ''[[The Passion of the Christ]]'' (2004), and [[Kevin Smith]]'s religious satire ''[[Dogma (film)|Dogma]]'' (1999).<ref>{{cite news |first=Roger |last=Ebert |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/dogma-1999 |title=Dogma |date=November 12, 1999 |newspaper=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |via=[[RogerEbert.com]] |access-date=April 23, 2022 |archive-date=April 23, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220423230809/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/dogma-1999 |url-status=live }}</ref> He defended [[Spike Lee]]'s ''[[Do the Right Thing]]'': "Some of the advance articles about this movie have suggested that it is an incitement to racial violence. Those articles say more about their authors than about the movie. I believe that any good-hearted person, white or black, will come out of this movie with sympathy for all of the characters. Lee does not ask us to forgive them, or even to understand everything they do, but he wants us to identify with their fears and frustrations. ''Do the Right Thing'' doesn't ask its audiences to choose sides; it is scrupulously fair to both sides, in a story where it is our society itself that is not fair."<ref>{{cite news| last=Ebert| first=Roger| date=June 30, 1989| title=Do the Right Thing| work=Chicago Sun-Times}}</ref>

===Contrarian reviews===
[[Metacritic]] later noted that Ebert tended to give more lenient ratings than most critics. His average film rating was 71%, if translated into a percentage, compared to 59% for the site as a whole. Of his reviews, 75% were positive and 75% of his ratings were better than his colleagues.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.metacritic.com/feature/remembering-roger-ebert |website=[[Metacritic]] |title=Remembering Roger Ebert: His reviews |access-date=October 20, 2017 |archive-date=November 23, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171123140724/http://www.metacritic.com/feature/remembering-roger-ebert |url-status=dead }}</ref> Ebert had acknowledged in 2008 that he gave higher ratings on average than other critics, though he said this was in part because he considered a rating of 3 out of 4 stars to be the general threshold for a film to get a "thumbs up."<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/you-give-out-too-many-stars |title=You give out too many stars |first=Roger |last=Ebert |website=www.rogerebert.com/ |date=December 14, 2012 |access-date=July 15, 2021 |archive-date=August 16, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210816125632/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/you-give-out-too-many-stars |url-status=live }}</ref>

Writing in ''[[Random House of Canada|Hazlitt]]'' about Ebert's reviews, Will Sloan argued that "[t]here were inevitably movies where he veered from consensus, but he was not provocative or idiosyncratic by nature."<ref name="sloan-hazlitt">{{cite web |url=https://hazlitt.net/feature/roger-eberts-zero-star-movies |title=Roger Ebert's Zero-Star Movies |website=[[Random House of Canada|Hazlitt]] |last=Sloan |first=Will |date=February 21, 2017 |access-date=March 10, 2019 |archive-date=September 4, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180904192043/https://hazlitt.net/feature/roger-eberts-zero-star-movies |url-status=live }}</ref> Examples of Ebert dissenting from other critics include his negative reviews of such celebrated films as [[Blue Velvet (film)|''Blue Velvet'']] ("marred by sophomoric satire and cheap shots"),<ref>{{cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |title=Blue Velvet |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/blue-velvet-1986 |newspaper=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |access-date=January 2, 2021 |date=September 19, 1986 |via=[[RogerEbert.com]] |archive-date=April 27, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210427124003/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/blue-velvet-1986 |url-status=live }}</ref> ''[[A Clockwork Orange (film)|A Clockwork Orange]]'' ("a paranoid right-wing fantasy masquerading as an [[Orwellian]] warning"),<ref>{{cite news |first=Roger |last=Ebert |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/a-clockwork-orange-1972 |title=A Clockwork Orange |newspaper=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |date=February 2, 1972 |access-date=April 23, 2022 |archive-date=July 1, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190701195957/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/a-clockwork-orange-1972 |url-status=live }}</ref> and ''[[The Usual Suspects]]'' ("To the degree that I do understand, I don't care").<ref>{{cite news |first=Roger |last=Ebert |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-usual-suspects-1995 |title=The Usual Suspects |newspaper=[[The Chicago Sun-Times]] |date=August 18, 1995 |access-date=April 23, 2022 |archive-date=April 26, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200426171724/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-usual-suspects-1995 |url-status=live }}</ref> He gave only two out of four stars to the widely acclaimed ''[[Brazil (1985 film)|Brazil]]'', calling it "very hard to follow"<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/brazil-1986 | title=Brazil movie review & film summary (1986) &#124; Roger Ebert | access-date=July 28, 2023 | archive-date=February 13, 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210213230759/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/brazil-1986 | url-status=live }}</ref> and is the only critic on [[RottenTomatoes]] to not like it.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1003033-brazil | title=Brazil - Rotten Tomatoes | website=[[Rotten Tomatoes]] | access-date=July 28, 2023 | archive-date=November 7, 2023 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231107110259/https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1003033-brazil | url-status=live }}</ref>

He gave a one-star review to the critically acclaimed [[Abbas Kiarostami]] film ''[[Taste of Cherry]]'', which won the ''[[Palme d'Or]]'' at the [[1997 Cannes Film Festival]].<ref>{{cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |title=Taste of Cherry |newspaper=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |date=February 27, 1998 |url=http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/taste-of-cherry-1998 |access-date=July 31, 2017 |via=[[RogerEbert.com]] |archive-date=April 27, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210427124019/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/taste-of-cherry-1998 |url-status=live }}</ref> Ebert later added the film to a list of his most-hated movies of all time.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/eberts-most-hated |work=[[RogerEbert.com]] |title=Ebert's Most Hated |access-date=July 31, 2017 |archive-date=August 2, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130802044414/http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/eberts-most-hated |url-status=live }}</ref> He was dismissive of the 1988 [[Bruce Willis]] action film ''[[Die Hard]]'', stating that "inappropriate and wrongheaded interruptions reveal the fragile nature of the plot".<ref>{{cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |title=Die Hard |url=http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19880715/REVIEWS/807150301/1023 |access-date=September 4, 2009 |work=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |date=July 15, 1988 |archive-date=March 2, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110302012747/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19880715/REVIEWS/807150301/1023 |url-status=dead |via=[[RogerEbert.com]]}}</ref> His positive 3 out of 4 stars review of 1997's ''[[Speed 2: Cruise Control]]'', "Movies like this embrace goofiness with an almost sensual pleasure"<ref>{{cite web |last1=Ebert |first1=Roger |title=Speed 2: Cruise Control movie review (1997) {{!}} Roger Ebert |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/speed-2-cruise-control-1997 |website=[[RogerEbert.com]] |access-date=February 14, 2023 |language=en |archive-date=July 23, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130723055317/http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/speed-2-cruise-control-1997 |url-status=live }}</ref> is one of only three positive reviews accounting for that film's 4% approval rating on the reviewer aggregator website [[Rotten Tomatoes]], one of the two others having been written by his ''At the Movies'' co-star Gene Siskel.<ref>{{cite web |title=Speed 2 - Cruise Control (1997) |url=http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/speed_2_cruise_control/ |website=[[Rotten Tomatoes]] |access-date=March 3, 2019 |archive-date=April 30, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190430074753/https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/speed_2_cruise_control |url-status=live }}</ref>

Ebert reflected on his ''Speed 2'' review in 2013, and wrote that it was "Frequently cited as an example of what a lousy critic I am," but defended his opinion, and noted, "I'm grateful to movies that show me what I haven't seen before, and ''Speed 2'' had a cruise ship plowing right up the main street of a Caribbean village."<ref name="speed3">{{cite web |last1=Ebert |first1=Roger |title="Speed 3"--Winner of my 1999 contest {{!}} Roger Ebert {{!}} Roger Ebert |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/speed-3-winner-of-my-1999-contest |website=[[RogerEbert.com]] |date=February 11, 2013 |access-date=February 14, 2023 |language=en |archive-date=February 14, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230214211237/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/speed-3-winner-of-my-1999-contest |url-status=live }}</ref> In 1999, Ebert held a contest for [[University of Colorado Boulder]] students to create short films with a ''Speed 3'' theme about an object that could not stop moving.<ref name="speed3"/> The winning entrant was set on a roller coaster and was screened at Ebertfest that year.<ref name="speed3"/>

===Other interests===
In addition to film, Ebert occasionally wrote about other topics for the ''Sun-Times'', such as music. In 1970, Ebert wrote the first published concert review of singer-songwriter [[John Prine]], who at the time was working as a mailman and performing at Chicago folk clubs.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Ebert |first1=Roger |title=John Prine: American Legend {{!}} Balder and Dash {{!}} Roger Ebert |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/balder-and-dash/john-prine-american-legend |website=www.rogerebert.com |date=November 14, 2010 |access-date=March 30, 2020 |language=en |archive-date=March 31, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200331072627/https://www.rogerebert.com/balder-and-dash/john-prine-american-legend |url-status=live }}</ref>

Ebert was a lifelong reader, and said he had "more or less every book I have owned since I was seven, starting with ''[[Adventures of Huckleberry Finn|Huckleberry Finn]]''." Among the authors he considered indispensable were [[William Shakespeare|Shakespeare]], [[Henry James]], [[Willa Cather]], [[Colette]] and [[Georges Simenon|Simenon]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=October 5, 2009 |title=Books do furnish a life |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/books-do-furnish-a-life |access-date=February 12, 2023 |archive-date=February 12, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230212233554/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/books-do-furnish-a-life |url-status=live }}</ref> He writes of his friend [[William Nack]]: "He approached literature like a gourmet. He relished it, savored it, inhaled it, and after memorizing it rolled it on his tongue and spoke it aloud. It was Nack who already knew in the early 1960s, when he was a very young man, that [[Vladimir Nabokov|Nabokov]] was perhaps the supreme stylist of modern novelists. He recited to me from ''[[Lolita]],'' and from ''[[Speak, Memory]]'' and [[Pnin (novel)|''Pnin'']]. I was spellbound." Every time Ebert saw Nack, he'd ask him to recite the last lines of ''[[The Great Gatsby]]''.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=October 17, 2010 |title=The storyteller and the stallion |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/the-storyteller-and-the-stallion |access-date=January 30, 2023 |archive-date=January 30, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230130044333/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/the-storyteller-and-the-stallion |url-status=live }}</ref> Reviewing ''[[Stone Reader]]'', he wrote: "get me in conversation with another reader, and I'll recite titles, too. Have you ever read ''[[The Quincunx]]''? ''[[The Raj Quartet]]''? ''[[A Fine Balance]]''? Ever heard of that most despairing of all travel books, ''The Saddest Pleasure'', by Moritz Thomsen? Does anybody hold up better than [[Joseph Conrad]] and Willa Cather? Know any [[Yeats]] by heart? Surely [[P. G. Wodehouse]] is as great at what he does as Shakespeare was at what he did."<ref>{{cite news| last=Ebert| first=Roger| title=Stone Reader| date=July 11, 2003| work=Chicago Sun Times| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/stone-reader-2003| access-date=April 10, 2024| archive-date=June 2, 2023| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230602122346/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/stone-reader-2003| url-status=live}}</ref> Among contemporary authors he admired [[Cormac McCarthy]], and credited ''[[Suttree]]'' with reviving his love of reading after his illness.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=October 24, 2008 |title=I think I'm musing my mind |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/i-think-im-musing-my-mind |access-date=February 25, 2023 |archive-date=February 25, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230225160338/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/i-think-im-musing-my-mind |url-status=live }}</ref> He also loved [[audiobooks]], particularly praising [[Sean Barrett (actor)|Sean Barrett]]'s reading of [[Perfume (novel)|''Perfume'']].<ref>{{cite web| last=Ebert| first=Roger| title=My new job. In his own words.| date=December 14, 2012| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/my-new-job-in-his-own-words| access-date=April 10, 2024| archive-date=December 5, 2023| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231205093341/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/my-new-job-in-his-own-words| url-status=live}}</ref> He was a fan of [[Hergé]]'s ''[[The Adventures of Tintin]]'', which he read in French.<ref>{{cite news| last=Ebert| first=Roger| title=Tintin! Tonnere de Brest! Mille sebords!| date=December 20, 2011| work=Chicago Sun-Times| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-adventures-of-tintin-2011| access-date=April 8, 2024| archive-date=May 7, 2013| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130507121446/http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-adventures-of-tintin-2011| url-status=live}}</ref>

Ebert first visited [[London]] in 1966 with his professor [[Daniel Curley]], who "started me on a lifelong practice of wandering around London. From 1966 to 2006, I visited London never less than once a year and usually more than that. Walking the city became a part of my education, and in this way I learned a little about architecture, British watercolors, music, theater and above all people. I felt a freedom in London I've never felt elsewhere. I made lasting friends. The city lends itself to walking, can be intensely exciting at eye level, and is being eaten alive block by block by brutal corporate leg-lifting." Ebert and Curley coauthored ''The Perfect London Walk''.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Engelhart |first=Katie |date=July 12, 2013 |title=Roger Ebert's Pilgrimage |work=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]] |url=https://slate.com/culture/2013/07/roger-eberts-lost-book-the-perfect-london-walk-reviewed.html |access-date=January 30, 2023 |archive-date=January 30, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230130044333/https://slate.com/culture/2013/07/roger-eberts-lost-book-the-perfect-london-walk-reviewed.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

Ebert attended the [[Conference on World Affairs]] at the [[University of Colorado Boulder]] for many years. It was there that he coined the Boulder Pledge: "Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anything offered to me as the result of an unsolicited e-mail message. Nor will I forward chain letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warnings to large numbers of others. This is my contribution to the survival of the online community."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.panix.com/~tbetz/boulder.shtml |title=Critical eye by Roger Ebert&nbsp;– Enough! A Modest Proposal to End the Junk Mail Plague |website=Panix.com |access-date=October 17, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090916074641/http://www.panix.com/~tbetz/boulder.shtml |archive-date=September 16, 2009 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.lumbercartel.ca/glossary/boulderpledge.pl |publisher=The Lumber Cartel, local 42 |title=Roger Ebert gets 'two thumbs up' from the Lumber Cartel for this distinct, well-written pledge |access-date=November 14, 2006 |archive-date=July 6, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110706185005/http://www.lumbercartel.ca/glossary/boulderpledge.pl |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |first=Bill |last=Weiman |url=http://bw.org/ube/boulder.html |title=Bill Weinman · Why I Keep The Boulder Pledge |website=Bw.org |access-date=January 27, 2017 |archive-date=December 27, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161227194551/http://bw.org/ube/boulder.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Starting in 1975, he hosted a program called Cinema Interruptus, where would analyze a film with an audience, and anyone could say "Stop!" to point out anything they found interesting. He wrote "[[Boulder, Colorado|Boulder]] is my hometown in an alternate universe. I have walked its streets by day and night, in rain, snow, and sunshine. I have made life-long friends there. I was in my twenties when I first came to the Conference on World Affairs and was greeted by [[Howard Higman]], its choleric founder, with 'Who invited you back?' Since then I have appeared on countless panels where I have learned and rehearsed debatemanship, the art of talking to anybody about anything." In 2009, Ebert invited [[Ramin Bahrani]] to join him in analyzing Bahrani's film [[Chop Shop (film)|''Chop Shop'']] a frame at a time. The next year, they invited Werner Herzog to join them in analyzing ''[[Aguirre, the Wrath of God]]''. After that, Ebert announced that he would not return to the conference: "It is fueled by speech, and I'm out of gas ... But I went there for my adult lifetime and had a hell of a good time."<ref>{{Cite book |last=Ebert |first=Roger |title=Life Itself |year=2011 |pages=189–191}}</ref>

===Relations with filmmakers===
Ebert wrote [[Martin Scorsese]]'s first review, for ''[[Who's That Knocking at My Door]]'', and predicted the director could be "an American Fellini someday."<ref name=Who'sThat/> He later wrote, "Of the directors who started making films since I came on the job, the best is Martin Scorsese. His camera is active, not passive. It doesn’t regard events, it participates in them. There is a sequence in ''[[GoodFellas]]'' that follows Henry Hill’s last day of freedom, before the cops swoop down. Scorsese uses an accelerating pacing and a paranoid camera that keeps looking around, and makes us feel what Hill feels. It is easy enough to make an audience feel basic emotions ('Play them like a piano,' Hitchcock advised), but hard to make them share a state of mind. Scorsese can do it."<ref name=Twenty-Five/> In 2000, Scorsese joined Ebert on his show in choosing the best films of the 1990s.<ref name=Scorsese/>

Ebert was an admirer of [[Werner Herzog]], and conducted a Q&A session with him at the [[Walker Art Center|Walker Arts Center]] in 1999. It was there that Herzog read his "Minnesota Declaration" which defined his idea of "ecstatic truth."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=April 30, 1999 |title=Herzog's Minnesota Declaration: Defining 'ecstatic truth' |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/herzogs-minnesota-declaration-defining-ecstatic-truth |website=RogerEbert.com |access-date=April 18, 2023 |archive-date=April 18, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230418224831/https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/herzogs-minnesota-declaration-defining-ecstatic-truth |url-status=live }}</ref> Herzog dedicated his ''[[Encounters at the End of the World]]'' to Ebert, and Ebert responded with an open letter of gratitude.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20071117%2FPEOPLE%2F71117002 |title=Roger Ebert. "A letter to Werner Herzog: In praise of rapturous truth" rogerebert.com November&nbsp;17, 2007 |work=Chicago Sun-Times |date=November 17, 2007 |access-date=October 17, 2009 |archive-date=December 31, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081231100314/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071117/PEOPLE/71117002 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Ebert often quoted something Herzog told him: "our civilization is starving for new images."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=August 28, 2005 |title=A conversation with Werner Herzog |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/interviews/a-conversation-with-werner-herzog |access-date=April 18, 2023 |archive-date=April 18, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230418224832/https://www.rogerebert.com/interviews/a-conversation-with-werner-herzog |url-status=live }}</ref>

When [[Vincent Gallo]]'s ''[[The Brown Bunny]]'' (2003) premiered at [[Cannes Film Festival | Cannes]], Ebert called it the worst film in the history of the festival. Gallo responded by putting a curse on his colon and a hex on his prostate. Ebert replied, "I had a colonoscopy once, and they let me watch it on TV. It was more entertaining than ''The Brown Bunny.''" Gallo called Ebert a "fat pig". Ebert replied: "It is true that I am fat, but one day I will be thin, and he will still be the director of ''The Brown Bunny.''"<ref>{{cite news| author=Roger Ebert| title=Gallo goes on the offensive after 'Bunny' flop| work=Chicago Sun Times| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/festivals/gallo-goes-on-the-offensive-after-bunny-flop}}</ref> Ebert gave the director's cut a positive review, writing that Gallo "is not the director of the same ''Brown Bunny'' I saw at Cannes, and the film now plays so differently that I suggest the original Cannes cut be included as part of the eventual DVD, so that viewers can see for themselves how 26 minutes of aggressively pointless and empty footage can sink a potentially successful film...Make no mistake: The Cannes version was a bad film, but now Gallo's editing has set free the good film inside."<ref>{{cite news| author=Roger Ebert| title=Revised editing releases a much improved 'Brown Bunny'| work=Chicago Sun-Times| date=September 3, 2004| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-brown-bunny-2004}}</ref> 

In 2005, ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'' critic [[Patrick Goldstein]] wrote that the year’s Best Picture Nominees were "ignored, unloved and turned down flat by most of the same studios that … bankroll hundreds of sequels, including a follow-up to ''Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo,'' a film that was sadly overlooked at Oscar time because apparently nobody had the foresight to invent a category for Best Running Penis Joke Delivered by a Third-Rate Comic." Rob Schneider responded in an open letter: "Well, Mr. Goldstein, I decided to do some research to find out what awards you have won. I went online and found that you have won nothing. Absolutely nothing. No journalistic awards of any kind … Maybe you didn’t win a Pulitzer Prize because they haven’t invented a category for Best Third-Rate, Unfunny Pompous Reporter Who’s Never Been Acknowledged by His Peers." Reviewing ''[[Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo]]'', Ebert responded: "Reading this, I was about to observe that Schneider can dish it out but he can’t take it. Then I found he’s not so good at dishing it out, either. I went online and found that Patrick Goldstein has won a National Headliner Award, a Los Angeles Press Club Award, a RockCritics.com award, and the Publicists’ Guild award for lifetime achievement ... Schneider is correct, and Patrick Goldstein has not yet won a Pulitzer Prize. Therefore, Goldstein is not qualified to complain that Columbia financed ''Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo'' while passing on the opportunity to participate in ''[[Million Dollar Baby]],'' ''[[Ray (film)| Ray]]'', ''[[The Aviator (2004 film) |The Aviator]],'' ''[[Sideways]]'' and ''[[Finding Neverland (film)| Finding Neverland]].'' As chance would have it, I ''have'' won the Pulitzer Prize, and so I am qualified. Speaking in my official capacity as a Pulitzer Prize winner, Mr. Schneider, your movie sucks."<ref>{{cite news| title='Bigalow' reaches new giga-low| author=Roger Ebert| date=August 11, 2005| work=[[Chicago Sun Times]]| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/deuce-bigalow-european-gigolo-2005}}</ref> After Ebert's cancer surgery, he received a bouquet from "Your Least Favorite Movie Star, Rob Schneider". Ebert wrote of the flowers, "They were a reminder, if I needed one, that although Rob Schneider might (in my opinion) have made a bad movie, he is not a bad man, and no doubt tried to make a wonderful movie, and hopes to again. I hope so, too."<ref>{{cite news| title=A bouquet arrives...| work=Roger Ebert's Journal| url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/a-bouquet-arrives}}</ref>

===Views on technology===
Ebert was a strong advocate for [[Maxivision]] 48, in which the movie projector runs at 48 frames per second, as compared to the usual 24 frames per second. He was opposed to the practice whereby theaters lower the intensity of their projector bulbs in order to extend the life of the bulb, arguing that this has little effect other than to make the film harder to see.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060219/ANSWERMAN/602190302/1023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070420012335/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060219/ANSWERMAN/602190302/1023 |url-status=dead |archive-date=April 20, 2007 |title=Ebert's "Movie Answer Man column", February&nbsp;19, 2006 |work=Chicago Sun-Times |access-date=October 17, 2009 }}</ref> Ebert was skeptical of the resurgence of [[3D film|3D effects in film]], which he found unrealistic and distracting.<ref>{{cite news |first=Roger |last=Ebert |url=http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/08/dminus_for_3d.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080817035951/http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/08/dminus_for_3d.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=August 17, 2008 |title=D-minus for 3-D |newspaper=[[Chicago Sun-Times]] |date=August 16, 2008 |access-date=October 17, 2009 }}</ref>

===Views on video games as an art form===

In 2005, Ebert opined that video games are not art, and are inferior to media created through authorial control, such as film and literature, stating, "video games can be elegant, subtle, sophisticated, challenging and visually wonderful," but "the nature of the medium prevents it from moving beyond craftsmanship to the stature of art."<ref>{{cite web |first=Roger |last=Ebert |url=http://www.rogerebert.com/answer-man/why-did-the-chicken-cross-the-genders |title=Why did the chicken cross the genders? |website=[[RogerEbert.com]] |date=November 27, 2005 |access-date=December 19, 2013 |archive-date=December 20, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131220104729/http://www.rogerebert.com/answer-man/why-did-the-chicken-cross-the-genders |url-status=live }}</ref> This resulted in negative reaction from video game enthusiasts,<ref>{{cite news |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=December 6, 2005 |title=Gamers fire flaming posts, e-mails |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/gamers-fire-flaming-posts-e-mails |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120622031553/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051206/COMMENTARY/51206002 |archive-date=June 22, 2012 |access-date=February 22, 2025 |website=[[RogerEbert.com]]}}</ref> such as writer [[Clive Barker]],<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.gamesindustry.biz/games-are-indeed-art-says-barker |first=Androvich |last=Mark |title=Games are indeed art, says Barker
 |publisher=gamesindustry.biz |date=June 27, 2007 |access-date=February 22, 2025}}</ref> who defended [[video games as an art form]]. Responding to Barker, Ebert wrote, "I believe art is created by an artist. If you change it, you become the artist," and said that the main attributes of video games "have more in common with sports" than they do with arts.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070721/COMMENTARY/70721001 |first=Roger |last=Ebert |title=Games vs. Art: Ebert vs. Barker |publisher=[[RogerEbert.com]] |date=July 21, 2007 |access-date=March 8, 2022 |archive-date=February 11, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130211235435/http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070721/COMMENTARY/70721001 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Ebert maintained his position in 2010, but conceded that he should not have expressed this skepticism without being more familiar with the actual experience of playing them. He admitted that he barely played video games: "I have played ''[[Cosmology of Kyoto]]'' which I enormously enjoyed, and ''[[Myst]]'' for which I lacked the patience."<ref name="lawn">{{cite web |author=Ebert, Roger |date=July 1, 2010 |url=http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/07/okay_kids_play_on_my_lawn.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100703023952/http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/07/okay_kids_play_on_my_lawn.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 3, 2010 |title=Okay, Kids, Play on my Lawn |website=Roger Ebert's Journal }}</ref> In the article, Ebert wrote, "It is quite possible a game could someday be great art."<ref name="lawn"/>

Ebert had reviewed ''Cosmology of Kyoto'' for ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' in 1994, and had praised the exploration, depth, and graphics found in the game, writing "This is the most beguiling computer game I have encountered, a seamless blend of information, adventure, humor, and imagination — the gruesome side-by-side with the divine."<ref name="cosmo1">{{cite magazine |last1=Ebert |first1=Roger |title=Cosmology of Kyoto |url=https://www.wired.com/1994/09/cosmology-of-kyoto/ |magazine=Wired |access-date=February 14, 2023 |archive-date=February 14, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230214204358/https://www.wired.com/1994/09/cosmology-of-kyoto/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Ebert filed one other video game-related article for ''Wired'' in 1994, in which he described his visit to [[Sega]]'s [[Joypolis]] arcade in Tokyo.<ref name="wired2">{{cite magazine |last1=Ebert |first1=Roger |title=Sega's Tokyo Joypolis |url=https://www.wired.com/1994/12/segas-tokyo-joypolis/ |magazine=Wired |access-date=February 14, 2023 |archive-date=February 14, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230214204358/https://www.wired.com/1994/12/segas-tokyo-joypolis/ |url-status=live }}</ref>


=== Appearances in other media ===
Ebert provided DVD [[audio commentary|audio commentaries]] for ''[[Citizen Kane]]'' (1941), [[Casablanca (film)|''Casablanca'']] (1942), ''[[Beyond the Valley of the Dolls]]'' (1970) and ''[[Dark City (1998 film)|Dark City]]'' (1998). For the [[Criterion Collection]], he recorded commentaries for ''[[Floating Weeds]]'' (1959) and [[Crumb (film)|''Crumb'']] (1994), the latter with director [[Terry Zwigoff]]. Ebert was also interviewed by [[Central Park Media]] for an extra feature on the DVD release of ''[[Grave of the Fireflies]]'' (1988).

In 1982, 1983 and 1985, [[Gene Siskel]] and Ebert appeared as themselves on ''[[Saturday Night Live]]''.<ref>{{cite episode|title=Chevy Chase|series=[[Saturday Night Live]]|air-date=September 25, 1982|season=8|number=1}}</ref><ref>{{cite episode|title=Brandon Tartikoff|series=[[Saturday Night Live]]|air-date=October 8, 1983|season=9|number=1}}</ref> For their first two appearances, they reviewed sketches from that night's telecast; for their last, they reviewed sketches from the "SNL Film Festival".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://vulture.com/2015/11/the-night-siskel-and-ebert-took-over-snl.html|title=The Night Siskel and Ebert Took Over 'SNL'|work=[[Vulture (website)|Vulture]] |date=November 18, 2015|first=Joe|last=Blevins|accessdate=July 19, 2022|archive-date=July 1, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220701192453/https://www.vulture.com/2015/11/the-night-siskel-and-ebert-took-over-snl.html|url-status=live}}</ref> In 1991, Siskel and Ebert appeared in the ''[[Sesame Street]]'' segment "Sneak Peek Previews" (a parody of ''Sneak Previews'').<ref name="Sesame Street">{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMlioyKsaQg|title=Sesame Street - "Sneak Peek Previews" with SISKEL & EBERT!|date=December 12, 2006 |via=www.youtube.com|access-date=August 12, 2023|archive-date=August 15, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230815115636/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMlioyKsaQg|url-status=live}}</ref> That year, the two were in the show's celebrity version of "[[Monster in the Mirror]]".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maYnqbdo2jw|title=Sesame Street - Monster in the Mirror (celebrity version)|date=March 26, 2007 |via=www.youtube.com|access-date=August 12, 2023|archive-date=August 12, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230812195853/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maYnqbdo2jw|url-status=live}}</ref> In 1995, Siskel and Ebert guest-starred on an episode of the animated sitcom ''[[The Critic]]''. In the episode, a parody of ''[[Sleepless in Seattle]],'' Siskel and Ebert split and each wants protagonist Jay Sherman, a fellow film critic, as his new partner.<ref name="The Critic">{{cite web|url=https://siskelebert.org/?p=6377|title=The Critic (cartoon) with the Voices of Gene and Roger, 1995|website=Siskel And Ebert Movie Reviews|accessdate=June 21, 2022|archive-date=July 2, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220702013558/https://siskelebert.org/?p=6377|url-status=live}}</ref>

In 1997, Ebert appeared in [[Pitch (film)| ''Pitch'']], a documentary by [[Spencer Rice]] and [[Kenny Hotz]]<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0125459/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm |title=Pitch (1997) Full cast & crew |website=IMDb |access-date=January 27, 2017 |archive-date=March 16, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160316044758/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0125459/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm |url-status=live }}</ref> and the Chicago-set television series ''[[Early Edition]]'',<ref name="The Cat">{{cite episode|title=The Cat|series=[[Early Edition]]|airdate=April 13, 1997|season=1|number=19}}</ref> where consoles a young boy who is depressed after he sees the character Bosco the Bunny die in a movie.<ref name=Questions>{{cite book |title=Questions for the Movie Answer Man |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=June 1, 1997 |publisher=Andrews McMeel Publishing |location=Kansas City, Missouri |page=[https://archive.org/details/questionsformovi00eber/page/99 99] |isbn=0-8362-2894-4 |quote=In the Spring of 1997, I did a guest appearance on the show, consoling a little boy who was depressed that Bosco the Bunny had died. |url=https://archive.org/details/questionsformovi00eber/page/99}}</ref> Ebert made a [[cameo appearance|cameo]] in ''[[Abby Singer (film)|Abby Singer]]'' (2003).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.hometheatersound.com/dvd/abby_singer.htm |title=Abby Singer |website=Home Theater & Sound |date=November 2007 |access-date=January 2, 2017 |archive-date=March 22, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190322165726/http://www.hometheatersound.com/dvd/abby_singer.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> In 2004, Ebert appeared in ''Sesame Street'''s direct-to-video special ''A Celebration of Me, Grover'', delivering a review of the ''[[Monsterpiece Theater]]'' segment "The King and I".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://imdb.com/title/tt31224538/|title=Sesame Street: A Celebration of Me, Grover (Video 2004)|website=[[IMDb]]|accessdate=July 19, 2022|archive-date=May 6, 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240506050941/https://www.imdb.com/title/tt31224538/|url-status=live}}</ref> Ebert was one of the principal critics featured in [[Gerald Peary]]'s 2009 documentary ''[[For the Love of Movies: The Story of American Film Criticism]]''. He discusses the dynamics of appearing with Gene Siskel on the 1970s show ''Coming to a Theatre Near You'', the predecessor of ''Sneak Previews'' on Chicago PBS station WTTW, and expresses approval of the proliferation of young people writing film reviews today on the internet.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title/775058/for-the-love-of-movies-the-story-of-american-film-criticism |title=For the Love of Movies: The Story of American Film Criticism |website=[[Turner Classic Movies|TCM Movie Database]] |access-date=December 16, 2012 |archive-date=May 16, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200516023321/http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title/775058/For-the-Love-of-Movies-The-Story-of-American-Film-Criticism/ |url-status=live }}</ref> On October 22, 2010, Ebert appeared with [[Robert Osborne]] on [[Turner Classic Movies]] during their "The Essentials" series. Ebert selected ''[[Sweet Smell of Success]]'' (1957) and ''[[The Lady Eve]]'' (1941).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tcm.com/this-month/article/339775%7c0/Critic-s-Choice-TCM-Spotlight-.html |title=Critic's Choice Introduction |author=Fristoe, Roger |publisher=TCM Film Article |access-date=April 30, 2015 |archive-date=September 4, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150904052102/http://www.tcm.com/this-month/article/339775%7c0/Critic-s-Choice-TCM-Spotlight-.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>

A "Mayor Ebert" ([[Michael Lerner (actor)|Michael Lerner]]) appeared in the [[Godzilla (1998 film)|1998 remake of]] ''[[Godzilla (1954 film)|Godzilla]]''. In his review, Ebert wrote: "Now that I've inspired a character in a Godzilla movie, all I really still desire is for several [[Ingmar Bergman]] characters to sit in a circle and read my reviews to one another in hushed tones."<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/godzilla-1998 |last=Ebert |first=Roger |title=Godzilla movie review & film summary (1998) &#124; Roger Ebert |access-date=April 8, 2024 |archive-date=April 4, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200404101113/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/godzilla-1998 |url-status=live }}</ref>