Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Your Movie Sucks

3.79 of 5 stars 3.79 · rating details · 616 ratings · 95 reviews

Roger Ebert's I Hated Hated Hated This Movie, which gathered some of his most scathing reviews, was a best-seller. This new collection continues the tradition, reviewing not only movies that were at the bottom of the barrel, but also movies that he found underneath the barrel.From Roger's review of Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo (0 stars): "The movie created a spot of cont...more Roger Ebert's I Hated Hated Hated This Movie, which gathered some of his most scathing reviews, was a best-seller. This new collection continues the tradition, reviewing not only movies that were at the bottom of the barrel, but also movies that he found underneath the barrel.From Roger's review of Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo (0 stars): "The movie created a spot of controversy in February 2005. According to a story by Larry Carroll of MTV News, Rob Schneider took offense when Patrick Goldstein of the Los Angeles Times listed this year's Best Picture nominees and wrote that they 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.'

Schneider retaliated by attacking Goldstein in full-page ads in Daily Variety and the Hollywood Reporter. In an open letter to Goldstein, Schneider wrote: '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. . . .'

Schneider was nominated for a 2000 Razzie Award for Worst Supporting Actor, but lost to Jar-Jar Binks. But 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, The Aviator, Sideways, and 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."(less)

Paperback, 368 pages

Published March 1st 2007 by Andrews McMeel Publishing

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Easy Riders, Raging Bulls by Peter Biskind

Books ABOUT Movies

14th out of 300 books — 97 voters

The Nigger of the Narcissus and the Secret Sharer by Joseph Conrad

A Harlot High and Low by Honoré de Balzac

Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, Cocksucker, Motherfucker, Tits.

59th out of 66 books — 11 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 1,066)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Apr 20, 2008 Erik rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Movie fans, Film lovers, Evil people

Roger Ebert sees crappy movies, so we don't have to.

For over 20 years, I've been a fan of Ebert, because - let's be honest - he has been the critic whose reviews most closely match my opinions. That's how we, as movie fans, tend to work. Ebert has written enthusiastically about movies I like, that none of my friends seem to (Dark City, Joe Vs. the Volcano), and he's been unimpressed with certain films that a non-critic supposedly was a dolt not to like (Pearl Harbor). However, and this is key t...more Roger Ebert sees crappy movies, so we don't have to.

For over 20 years, I've been a fan of Ebert, because - let's be honest - he has been the critic whose reviews most closely match my opinions. That's how we, as movie fans, tend to work. Ebert has written enthusiastically about movies I like, that none of my friends seem to (Dark City, Joe Vs. the Volcano), and he's been unimpressed with certain films that a non-critic supposedly was a dolt not to like (Pearl Harbor). However, and this is key to Ebert's abilities as a critic, he always plays fair with his evaluation of a movie's merits. He knows enough about film that he's able to compare the movie he sees to the one the filmmakers were trying to make. The distinction is important because too many critics' reviews, good or bad, are reactions to the film's comparison to the one the critic might have made instead. In this way, Ebert is uncommonly generous toward the simple, fun, stupid movies we all love -- and he's earned the right to get downright cutting with the movies that fall flat, and waste our time.

Watching a good film is fun and rewarding. Reading a critic's positive review for a film you already like gives one the chance to feel affirmed, maybe vindicated... or maybe like the only smart moviegoer in your group. Reading a bad review of a movie you hate can be all that, with the added bonus of prompting fits of evil cackling. Somehow, knowing a smart critic thought even less than you did of, say, a "Deuce Bigalow" movie makes the pain a little easier to work through.

Even aside from the quality of the criticism, Ebert is an excellent writer. And it's incredibly fun to see a good writer let loose, in the service of savaging a horrible film. Watching a good writer administer exactly the right dose of poison is a different sort of fun, and Ebert has the chance to do both here. Most of the time he's more surgical in his approach, calmly and evenly explaining why a movie does, indeed, suck. But now and then, he simply goes medieval, and kicks bad movies while they're down. Don't worry, though -- they all deserve it. (less)

4 likes · like · see review

Aug 30, 2007 Fuzzy rated it 4 of 5 stars

This book is a sequel of sorts to Roger Ebert's earlier I Hated Hated Hated This Movie -- both collections of his reviews of movies he enjoyed the least. The earlier book covered a few decades of reviews and so it had the stringent requirement of one star or less; the new book covers just the 21st century and so, I assume to pad out the book a bit, includes 1.5 star movies. It does mean that some of the reviews are less vitriolic and more Ebert basically saying, "eh."

But when Ebert is on a tear,...more

2 likes · like · see review

Nov 02, 2011 Anna rated it 4 of 5 stars

I often enjoy Ebert's film reviews regardless of the quality of the film, but he is really damn good at completely eviscerating crappy movies. Even if you haven't seen the film(s) in question, his reviews are always thought-provoking and funny, and sometimes go in wholly unexpected but awesome directions (see his digression regarding Cronenberg's "Crash" contained in the review of John Waters's "A Dirty Shame"). This volume collects reviews of 0, 1 and 1 1/2 star ratings from 2000 to 2006; most...more

1 like · like · see review

Aug 24, 2011 Sean O'Hara rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: film

This is Roger Ebert's analysis of the oeuvre of Ashton Kutcher. Okay, that's an exaggeration, but only just. Kutcher's films do pop up in this book at a rate exceeding even David Spade and Rob Schneider (derp-de-derp-de-derp!), though Schneider is the subject of Ebert's best review ever, the one from which this book derives its title. When Schneider through a hissy-fit about a critic panning one of his movies (I think it was, The Stapler) and complained that the guy had never won a Pulitzer or a...more This is Roger Ebert's analysis of the oeuvre of Ashton Kutcher. Okay, that's an exaggeration, but only just. Kutcher's films do pop up in this book at a rate exceeding even David Spade and Rob Schneider (derp-de-derp-de-derp!), though Schneider is the subject of Ebert's best review ever, the one from which this book derives its title. When Schneider through a hissy-fit about a critic panning one of his movies (I think it was, The Stapler) and complained that the guy had never won a Pulitzer or anything and was thus unqualified to state a position on Schneider's cinematic out-put, Ebert glided in and pointed out that he does have a Pulitzer, which makes him qualified to state an opinion on the film, and that film does, indeed, suck.

The book also contains a recapitulation of The Brown Bunny controversy. When the film premiered at Cannes in a rough form, it was universally panned, but Ebert's review, comparing it to his colonoscopy, was the one most widely quoted. Vincent Gallo shot back and the two engaged in a very public war of words. Eventually Gallo released a trimmed-down version of the film, which Ebert admitted was a pretty good movie, and he penned a mea culpa. By then the damage was done, and even today more people associate the film with the colonoscopy comment than Ebert's revised review. Since this book will, in the long run, be read by more people than the original review, hopefully it will undo some of the damage to TBB's reputation.

The rest of the book contains Eberts greatest critical drubbings from c.2000-2006, including classic bad movies like Battlefield: Earth ("The director, Roger Christian, has learned from better films that directors sometimes tilt their cameras, but he has not learned why.") and The Lady's Man ("[Lorne Michaels'] average star rating for the last four titles is 1.125. Just to put things in perspective, the last three Pauly Shore movies I reviewed scored 1.5.") The amazing thing is that a book of this size can be culled from just his bad reviews from a small portion of his career. The lead critic at most newspapers only does one or two films per week, while Ebert watches almost every movie to come out -- at one point he says he watches 500 films per year.

While Ebert isn't an intellectual heavyweight like Sarris or Kael, he makes up for it with sarcasm and incisiveness. (One thing that became clear from reading this book is that he's the godfather of TV Tropes.) And while people often complain that Ebert is a stuck up snob and ordinary film-goers shouldn't listen to what he says, history has borne out 99% of the reviews in this book. There are only two movies here that I think he made a bad call on -- Team America: World Police and Josie and the Pussycats (Josie and the Pussycats is the best movie ever!), and even I'm willing to admit that I'm a voice in the wilderness on Josie. Every other film he pans, even the ones that were hits, is forgotten today.

The only flaw with the book is that it's weighted too heavily towards comedies (though "alleged comedies" might be more accurate). Ebert's critiques of them are very good intellectually -- the man is an expert on comedic structure and theory -- but they aren't very entertaining compared to his pans of serious movies, where he's able to let loose and skewer the film with his own wit.(less)

like · see review

Jul 24, 2011 Ana Mardoll rated it 4 of 5 stars

Your Movie Sucks / 9780740763663

I bought this during the Amazon Kindle sale and it's certainly a bargain -- there's a huge wealth of reviews here, most of them with at least one or two good laughs and several of them screamingly funny. I'm exactly the sort of cynical soul that absolutely loves a well-turned 1-star review of material that deserves it, though, so of course I would be predisposed to like the book.

Others may be slightly less enthralled with the material here. Ebert is quite humorou...more Your Movie Sucks / 9780740763663

I bought this during the Amazon Kindle sale and it's certainly a bargain -- there's a huge wealth of reviews here, most of them with at least one or two good laughs and several of them screamingly funny. I'm exactly the sort of cynical soul that absolutely loves a well-turned 1-star review of material that deserves it, though, so of course I would be predisposed to like the book.

Others may be slightly less enthralled with the material here. Ebert is quite humorous and writes very well, but a few of the reviews fall a little flat and seem a touch mechanical -- these occasions are few and far between, and I forgave them because when you're writing a hundred reviews a day (or however many -- there are even film festival films here that most people will have never heard of!) it stands to reason they won't ALL be home-runs. Then, too, some of the plot details come off a little wrong in some cases, particularly with some of the scifi movies -- one wonders if Ebert was given an early copy to review or if some of the technobabble was so rapid-fire that he naturally missed a few details. Whether this is a failing of the movie (for failing to be more clear) or a failing of the reviewer (for failing to pay better attention) will be subjective to the reader, I think.

Then, too, Ebert seems to have a few, ah, "sensitivity blindspots". He uses the word 'retarded' as an adjective in several reviews, not as a pejorative, but merely in a descriptive sense, however, I think this is not a term that all readers will appreciate seeing in print, as I believe there are better descriptions available. He may also have some blinders with regards to female characters and roles; at least one review questions the appropriate age of the actress with regards to her character, and several movies are lambasted for having women be inappropriately violent towards men -- all well and good, but I can't recall the same criticism being level in the reverse, towards a movie that is overly violent towards women. Maybe none of those were released in this time period, and therefore couldn't be included in the book, but one begins to wonder if the former is sensational and the latter merely commonplace.

For myself, personally, I enjoyed this book immensely. I'll read it again and again for fun, and it was a great bargain choice for myself. I'd give it five stars except for some of the sensitivity quirks of the writing; I was able to look past them, but I would feel a little uncomfortable recommending this book without pointing out some of its flaws.

~ Ana Mardoll(less)

like · see review

May 15, 2010 Dylan rated it 4 of 5 stars

There’s something about an amalgamation of entirely negative reviews that seems to speak to the worst of film criticism in the Internet age. The strain of criticism that has emerged and festered under anonymity online is more about vitriol and ridicule than any real thoughtful analysis of film, and unfortunately professional film critics are no longer exempt from this phenomenon. A good number of reviews have become outlets for jaded critics to string together as many insults and attempts at sna...more

like · see review

Aug 17, 2011 Mike (the Paladin) rated it 4 of 5 stars

I liked the first Ebert collection I read (while not agreeing with every review, I did enjoy the turn of phrase and the at times somewhat savage pen). So upon recommendation I got this one.

This one was just as humorous and none of the movies in it were among those I'd say I actually like. That made it even more easy to appreciate the reviews. Some of the movies in this book I enjoyed more than others of course, a few I'd say I found "not too bad"...BUT on the other hand some were so spectacularl...more

1 like · like · see review

Jan 07, 2013 Barbara rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction

The title references a review Mr. Ebert did of the horrifically bad Rob Schneider film, Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo. I love reading Mr. Ebert's reviews, mostly because he and I tend to agree about what we don't like with respect to films. I disagree with him on a few things, though: I loved the Transformers trilogy, simply because I knew going in that I was going to watch giant robots and collateral damage. And that's all I wanted to see, really. Plot and characterization were secondary (if M...more

like · see review

May 22, 2012 Kayla rated it 3 of 5 stars

Well, it certainly was a book of reviews by Roger Ebert. The quick review of this book is this - it is a book that has a great inspiration to draw from - a justified hatred of Rob Shneider - and loses its vitriolic wittiness as it moves away from Ebert's main object of loathing.

Going further into this point, I will say that I read about the first half of this book pretty faithfully. I even read reviews of films I have never seen or intend to ever see. As I continued to read, however, I began to...more

like · see review

Jan 06, 2011 Twobusy rated it 4 of 5 stars

I more or less grew up watching Ebert on PBS (and then in syndication), and over the past year+ I've grown to really enjoy his voice on Twitter — which has motivated me to explore his writing more fully. Your Movie Sucks is the first book of his that I've purchased, but it won't be the last: it's a compulsively fun collection of some of his best reviews of really, really, really terrible movies (at least, terrible by his reckoning). As a lover of film with an appreciation of both high and low ci...more

like · see review

Sep 02, 2009 Dylan Clark rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: reference-film

I was incredibly enthusiastic about this book as soon as I saw the title. Reading the back cover (taken from Ebert's review for "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo), had me even more pumped. As someone who has never read anything by Roger Ebert before, knowing him simply as the thumb guy, I was impressed with the review's self consciousness and outright snark. As I said, I was enthusiastic, but the feeling, while not entirely disappearing, certainly subsided.
Actually opening the book yielded a coupl...more I was incredibly enthusiastic about this book as soon as I saw the title. Reading the back cover (taken from Ebert's review for "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo), had me even more pumped. As someone who has never read anything by Roger Ebert before, knowing him simply as the thumb guy, I was impressed with the review's self consciousness and outright snark. As I said, I was enthusiastic, but the feeling, while not entirely disappearing, certainly subsided.
Actually opening the book yielded a couple of introductory texts, including the complete review of "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo" and an account of the Ebert/Gallo feud over the film "Brown Bunny." Again, I was impressed by Ebert's playful attitude and willingness to allow for the film's redemption. Once you get past this introduction however, the book is simply an alphabetized collection of Ebert's post-2000 less-than-two-star reviews.
While some of the reviews are not without charm, or even hilarious moments, the anthologizing of the opinions of a single person over such a relatively short period of time in his career lends itself to certain touches of repetitiveness. While I can certainly sympathize with the task of having to come up with original reviews for each and every movie, reading through them all at once can get to be something of a chore.
The apparently most important thing that I have learned from this book is that I should see "There's Something About Mary." Every single sex comedy in the book (and there are a lot of them... as many are, in fact, quite poor) is compared unfavourably to this Magnum Opus of semen humour. At least a half dozen times, Ebert makes reference to the "hair gel" scene, and how no other scene in recent history has been as funny.
Another fact that I took issue with is that 90% of most of the reviews are plot summary. While in some cases, the story being retold with a trace of acidic sarcasm is enough to explain why the film is bad, I generally felt disappointed by the lack of reasoning why the movies received the ratings they did. Granted, there are some exceptions, but more often than not, plot summary is the rule.
My third, and most vehement issue with the book is with the rating he gave "Death To Smoochy." This movie was awesome. I am the only one in the world who thinks so, but it pains me to be constantly reminded about how wrong-brained either I, or the rest of the world, is. This movie aside, Ebert and I were rarely far off in our opinions, particularly in regards to the unacceptable, irredeemable "Freddy Got Fingered."
Ebert makes gracious (not quite gratuitous) use of words and phrases from his own "Little Movie Glossary." In one case, he even suggests the reader to pick up a copy. Shameless? Yes. Forgivable? Maybe. In most situations, however, the phrases he uses are self-explaining, and, quite helpfully capitalized. After reading this book, I feel like I am more adept at picking out a Meet Cute than ever before.
The most important thing I will take from this book is a different way of watching movies. Ebert hates when things happen in movies because it is the way things happen in movies. While being willing to suspend disbelief, he admirably demands for the films he watches to make sense and be supportable by conceivable motivations or human behaviours. It wasn't until reading this book that I realized how much nonsense I have let wash over me for the sake of trying to enjoy a movie. It is very possible that Roger Ebert has single-handedly changed the way I watch movies. I don't know if I like it.

*I had one last thing to say but liked how my review ended, so I'll say it in a P.S.: The last few pages of the book are an index, directed a reader toward which page has which review. I'll give that minute to settle in. Yes, there is an alphabetical index in a book which has all of its reviews listed in alphabetical order, not unlike having a cheat sheet in a dictionary or a phone book.(less)

1 like · like · see review

Feb 26, 2012 Kasa Cotugno rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: subject-show-biz, genre-essay, location-usa-chicago

It is with great pride that I admit to only seeing one movie out of those in this delicious collection. (The Village.) Usually I don't read reviews of movies I haven't seen, and rarely read reviews before seeing movies. Nowadays I check the generalized ratings to see whether I want to brave the theater and its subsequent "issues," wait to watch on dvd/cable, or skip altogether. Since there's no chance of my seeing any of these turkeys, I felt it was safe to read the book, since negative reviews...more

like · see review

Jun 14, 2010 Craig Williams rated it 4 of 5 stars

I've always respected Roger Ebert as a movie critic, even if I don't always agree with his reviews. In fact, there was a time I used to despise him because it seemed as if he panned every movie I liked. Turned out, though, that I just had an abominable taste in movies. Don't blame me, I was a teenager at the time - we all have awful taste in everything at that age.

I used to watch Siskel and Ebert with much fervor, because I saw them as the frontline for the slew of new movie releases. When I got...more I've always respected Roger Ebert as a movie critic, even if I don't always agree with his reviews. In fact, there was a time I used to despise him because it seemed as if he panned every movie I liked. Turned out, though, that I just had an abominable taste in movies. Don't blame me, I was a teenager at the time - we all have awful taste in everything at that age.

I used to watch Siskel and Ebert with much fervor, because I saw them as the frontline for the slew of new movie releases. When I got my license, I made it a mission to see a movie every weekend, without fail, and would rely on Siskel and Ebert's reviews (amongst others) as a guideline on what to see, and what to avoid like a plague. I still turn to Rotten Tomato when I'm in the mood to see a movie, but don't know what's out that's worth watching.

As I grew up, and matured, so did my movie taste, which was greatly aided by getting a minor in Film Studies. I finally came to respect the expertise necessary to make a good film, and the expertise necessary to appreciate a good film. As I read this book, I began to realize that, for all of my love/hate relationship with Ebert's film taste, the man knows film - he knows what he's talking about. Throughout this book, I could scarcely disagree with most, if not all, of the movies cited that he believed really sucked. I even had to grudgingly admit that his review of Silent Hill was pretty spot on, which is a movie I love, but only because I'm a fan of the video game series its based off of. Ebert acknowledges that the movie will probably appeal to fans really well, that its beautifully shot, and the art production was terrific - however, the plot is confusing, and the characters laughably two dimensional. He's absolutely right.

While I didn't find his reviews stupendously funny, he almost always provides adequate reasoning for why he hated a movie, and that, in itself, was entertainment enough. On a side note, I never realized what a huge perv Ebert is until reading this book; several of his reviews are littered with bitterness that the filmmakers didn't utilize opportunities to feature their beautiful actresses nude. You know, Ebert and I are a lot more alike than I ever realized...
(less)

like · see review

Mar 28, 2008 Jim rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: fans of Ebert's reviews

Shelves: tv-movies

Another fabulous collection of Roger Ebert's reviews of terrible movies. For some movies the effort he spends on the review is probably more than the filmmakers spent on the script! Great stuff.

1 like · like · see review

Jan 11, 2012 John rated it 4 of 5 stars

Roger Ebert is a national treasure, and let's face it: some of his best stuff is when it's clear he'd rather be writing about anything in the world other than the movie he just saw. This is the man who gave Gigli a 2.5/4 and said it really wasn't all that bad, really. Ebert's a Guy who once wrote the screenplay to a crappy movie himself and who realizes that even a bad film is the result of a lot of hard work. As such, when he gives the movie a single star or les, it's because he really, really...more

like · see review

May 23, 2013 Bruce Baugh rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is a great book. It is often hilarious, in a variety of styles from bemusement to sympathetic condolence to sarcasm, and clear about the failings of a lot of bad movies. But it's more than that. It's very thoughtful about what might have turned failure into success, and profoundly sympathetic to ambitious struggles that don't work out. There's a lot of food for thought here about many ways movies can work, and about what it takes for them to get there. There's also autobiographical rambling...more

like · see review

Jan 23, 2012 Ruthiewhy rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction

This was a gift, and I wouldn't normally have chosen to read a collection of Ebert's reviews; I've always considered him somewhat overrated. He has a vaguely conservative moral stance that sneaks into his writing, and it irritated me that when we disagreed about a film it was usually because he was rating it on its morality rather than its quality. An example: giving Team America: World Police one star not because he didn't find it funny, but because he disliked its nihilism.

Saying that, he has...more

1 like · like · see review

May 19, 2013 Sofia rated it 3 of 5 stars

I love Roger Ebert--his writing style, his critiques, his analyses. After he died, I bought this nook book and figured I'd give him a read, starting with this one instead of "I Hated, Hated, Hated This Movie" because most of these reviews were for movies released after 2000. Of course, his writing is witty, on point, and deliciously scathing at times. There were several lines and reviews that had me laughing out loud. The only reason I'm giving this three stars instead of four is because you can...more

like · see review

Jan 08, 2008 Wotsac rated it 3 of 5 stars

Roger Ebert's book Your Movie Sucks begins with the story of his reviews of movie Brown Bunny, which he initially panned and later respected. Ebert explained how assiduous editing had turned Brown Bunny from the disaster which he initially lambasted into a respectable film.

Your Move Sucks is not a disaster -- it's simply a ramblingly unnecessary book that would have been better if it had been a hundred pages shorter. Shorn to a hundred pages it might have even been incisive. Released only eight...more

like · see review

Apr 24, 2013 Bryson Kopf rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: criticism, adults, movies, non-fiction

I think like a lot of people, I grew up seeing Ebert on TV, so it is always a pleasure to be reminded what a fantastic writer he was on film. Even though this is a collection of reviews on movies he hated, Ebert's love and deep knowledge of film shines through. Favorite reviews in this book include House of D (which inspires a new word, doofusiod), Tomcats ("This plot is engraved on a plaque in the men's room of the Old Writer's Retirement Home."), and so many others. Thanks for the reviews Roge...more

like · see review

Jan 06, 2013 Ethan rated it 3 of 5 stars

Face it: bad reviews are more fun. And some of these reviews are great--I actually laughed out loud when Ebert made fun of a filmmaker's attempt to hide Steven Seagal's double chin, and his attacks on genre cliches are excellent. Other reviews are less inspired. Several reviews are defenses of Ebert's own taste--these are decidedly unfun, especially when Ebert sucks up to Quentin Tarantino.

But overall this is an enjoyable read. Recommended for those who want to feed their inner Schadenfreuders.

like · see review

Sep 26, 2011 Jeff rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

About halfway through the book I realized the chapter headings were letters of the alphabet and not roman numerals. I would like to pretend it was because I was so engrossed in the book that I couldn't pay attention, but I probably just missed it.
This book was entertaining, full of horrible movies, which reminded me that I have alot of these films in my library. Ebert is eloquent and has a singular wit in his reviews, the guy loves what works and can tell you what movie it worked in. Very entert...more

1 like · like · see review

Apr 17, 2013 Tracey Sinclair rated it 4 of 5 stars

Entertaining snark with Ebert's usual touch of humanity and a sharp eye for the ridiculous. I enjoyed it even though I hadn't seen most of the movies. One point, though: this is a book by a professional writer published by a major publishing house and yet the editing and formatting were shocking: film titles partiall italicised, sometimes not at all (in one bit he writes something then says 'italics mine' but there are no italics to be had) and there are missing full stops, and bad punctuation....more

like · see review

May 09, 2013 Mmyoung rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Ebert certainly had a way with words and the movies he chose to review were extremely easy to mock...so in that sense it was very enjoyable. In another sense it was disappointing to find that Ebert not only brought relentlessly middle-American sensibilities, knowledge and taste to the judgement of these movies as though this was an objective measure he also indulged too frequently in mocking the film because it was not accessible or pleasing to people just like him.

like · see review

May 31, 2007 erin rated it 5 of 5 stars

(April 2007) I cannot WAIT to get into this book!

Okay, now that I have, I can say that it is everything that the title says that it is. It is a collection of Ebert's more recent reviews of the awful movies that are made every year and it is an easy read, quite freqently it's hilarious, and sometimes it has me diving for my dictionary to understand the insult. Most often, the reviews have me looking for pen and paper to note a referenced movie classic...some day I'll get around to watching movies...more

like · see review

Oct 21, 2010 James rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: arts, culture-and-politics, entertainment-and-recreation, humor, reference

A lot of fun. Ebert has a flair for expressive language, and unlike some critics, when he pans a film he is careful to explain where he feels it failed, rather than simply slamming it or treating his own taste or ideology as some sort of objective standard. He gives filmmakers credit for daring when they take creative risks, even if they fall short of their aims, and he separates his judgments of their works from judgment of the filmmakers themselves.

like · see review

Apr 22, 2008 Donna rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: movie fans, anyone who misses seeing Ebert on TV.

Shelves: nonfiction

This is a collection of Ebert's reviews for bad movies released between 2000-2006. Star ratings range from 0 to 1.5 stars. Begin with his review for Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo, which is the inspiration for the book's title. Then, for a good laugh, take a look at the index and pick out the movies that you've seen and also hated. Next, pick out the movies that you haven't seen, but have heard are sucky. It's also fun to pick through the flops that star big name people who should have known better....more

like · see review

Nov 21, 2012 Adam Wiggins rated it 3 of 5 stars

Roger Ebert loves movies, and this makes him uniquely qualified to deliver a literal evisceration of bad films.

He's a great writer and has a great skill for finding and exposing cliche. Most of these movies I hadn't seen or even heard of, since they are all the bad movies from the last decade, and bad movies are less likely to be seen or remembered than good ones.

I skipped through a lot of it.

like · see review

Jan 27, 2013 Veeral rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: funny, non-fiction

I have been a longtime fan of Mr. Ebert's reviews. He is funny, brutal and makes sure that we don't waste our money on drivel churned out by the Hollywood. And he did the same in this book. Read this book if you want to have a good laugh and meanwhile consider yourself lucky that you are not working in Hollywood or it could have been you getting your ass reviewed somewhere in this book.

4 likes · like · see review

May 02, 2009 Ed rated it 3 of 5 stars

While I loved this book, I prefer the earlier one because I hadn't heard of about two thirds of the movies. Here the movies are from the last 20 years and I had already read most of these reviews when they were originally written. Still, the writing is up to par even if Ebert matured past his funny smart ass comments. If you liked the other, there is no reason you won't like this one.

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 35 36 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (2)

Genres

Non Fiction

55 users

Culture > Film

26 users

Media Tie In > Movies

15 users

Humor

10 users

Writing > Essays

8 users

Reference

7 users

Criticism

6 users

Culture

4 users

Humor > Funny

2 users

Anthologies > Collections

2 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Roger Ebert

Roger Joseph Ebert was a Pulitzer Prize-winning American film critic and screenwriter.

He was known for his weekly review column (appearing in the Chicago Sun-Times since 1967, and later online) and for the television program Siskel & Ebert at the Movies, which he co-hosted for 23 years with Gene Siskel. After Siskel's death in 1999, he auditioned several potential replacements, ultimately choo...more

More about Roger Ebert...

Books by Roger Ebert

Awake in the Dark: The Best of Roger Ebert

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About Your Movie Sucks

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

title link	preview: Your Movie Sucks
avg rating	preview: Your Movie Sucks Goodreads rating: 3.79 (616 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/96765.Your_Movie_Sucks?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348036427l/96765.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/96765.Your_Movie_Sucks?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Your Movie Sucks by Roger Ebert[/url]

Your Movie Sucks

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website