What's with Roger Ebert and... sex... recently?

I had to go look up Ebert's review of Phantom Menace since it came up in another thread.  While I was there, I decided to read some of his comments on some other recent movies.

Here are some snippets (all PG-13 movies):

It starts basic enough:

 

Green Lantern:

We demand one chaste kiss between hero and heroine, but no funny stuff.

 

Captain America:

Young Steve's Army confidante both before and after his transformation is the sultry Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell), whose full red lips make her resemble a classic military pin-up of the period. ... they grow close, but only PG-13 close, because Marvel has apparently determined that fanboys find sex to be icky.

 

Rise of the Apes:

Whether she becomes Will's surrogate wife is an excellent question; the movie displays the usual PG-13 shyness about intimate details;

 

And a bit of a stretch: X-Men: First Class

At least all the X-Men are old enough to see an R-rated movie without adult supervision. Not that "X-Men" is R-rated; god forbid that a comic-book movie should turn away a single eager ticket-buyer.

 

And The Finale: Cowboys and Aliens:

One alien element has become almost traditional. Ever since "Alien," we've had the phenomenon of aliens who unfold to reveal wicked inner parts. The aliens here have chest cavities that open to extrude three-fingered hands, slimy with mucus. One shudders to envision the use of these limbs during sex. On their home world, there must be fortunes to be made in opening manicure shops.

Winner winner, chicken dinner.

And those are all of the reviews I read today.  I stopped reading Ebert years ago, but what's happened to the man?  He seems to be very upset that PG-13 ratings are standing between him and seeing famous boobs.

In every single review?

Bingowings said:

When 900 years old you reach, get as much, you will not.

 It's not the years, sweetheart... It's the chinnage.

TheBoost said:

xhonzi said:

 

Here are some snippets (all PG-13 movies):

Green Lantern:

We demand one chaste kiss between hero and heroine, but no funny stuff.

 

Captain America:

Young Steve's Army confidante both before and after his transformation is the sultry Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell), whose full red lips make her resemble a classic military pin-up of the period. ... they grow close, but only PG-13 close, because Marvel has apparently determined that fanboys find sex to be icky.

 

Rise of the Apes:

Whether she becomes Will's surrogate wife is an excellent question; the movie displays the usual PG-13 shyness about intimate details;

 

And a bit of a stretch: X-Men: First Class

At least all the X-Men are old enough to see an R-rated movie without adult supervision. Not that "X-Men" is R-rated; god forbid that a comic-book movie should turn away a single eager ticket-buyer.

Winner winner, chicken dinner.

And those are all of the reviews I read today.  I stopped reading Ebert years ago, but what's happened to the man?  He seems to be very upset that PG-13 ratings are standing between him and seeing famous boobs.

I think it's partly the annoyance of the obligatory chaste romance in these films, not that the romance itself is chaste.

Really?  I don't see that at all.  Perhaps in the case of Green Lantern, but not the others.  He seems to be upset that these films don't have sex scenes.  Enough to keep calling it out in his reviews.

He blames Marvel in the case of Cap.  Then he blames PG-13 in the case of Apes.  I know what I was expecting when I went to go see Rise of the Apes: Full frontal nudity.  And more "intimate details" between the  scientist who accidentally created an untelligent breed of ape and his wife.  And maybe some apes.  You know... rising.  If there's time left after all of the "intimate details" are laid out.  *wink wink*

He gave the third mummy film a good review, indiana jones IV a good review, the prequels of star wars good reviews. Yet he gave JJ trek half a star less than star trek V.

He actually rated the last Trek film as the worst in the series.

Does anyone actually give his views any credence anymore?

His writings are 99% of the time spot on. I don't always agree with his star rating, but neither does he.

I will admit seeing Harry Potter 7 pt. II with 3.5/4 just above The Man Who Fell to Earth 3/4 really irked me and I haven't really liked some of his recent "Great Movie" choices (LA Confidential? Seriously? The Chinatown ripoff with elements of 50's corruption?) but you don't see eye to eye with everyone.

Ebert has always been one of the only critics I have any respect for. (As of now the only other one is David Thompson. Yeah, that's right I implied it: no Bordwell! Hah!) The man knows movies, and knows how to write about them and keep that emotional connection intact. His first two Great Movies volumes next to maybe Hitchcock/Truffaut are the best books on film ever written.

If you think his reviews have gotten more spirited, check out his facebook/blog/twitter. Enjoyable reads but incessantly posts!

twooffour said:

Xhonzi, you've been a weirdo since I first read your posts about raising OT children, and you're still one now.

If you wanna read crazy perverted sex fantasies into a few sardonic remarks about a topic made fun of all the god damn time, please continue to do so. Whatever floats your boat.

It is Ebert injecting sex into critiques of fantasy movies not about sex. "Hehe", he thinks the characters aren't intimate enough or he likes to muse about slimy alien sex. It does appear to be something of an obsession for him. What topic do you think he is making fun of? American morality and the attendant rating system? Lacking reality of intimate relations (albeit in fantasy movies)? Ebert's commentary is overdone. Maybe Ebert enjoys watching "The Brown Bunny" all day long, but many of us don't find the topic so compelling it must come up in Captain America, Green Lantern, X-Men, etc. They are designed to appeal to children as well as adults. Maybe Ebert is ever so witty he raises the issue in reviews of Disney movies as well.

twooffour said:

Xhonzi,
If you wanna read crazy perverted sex fantasies into a few sardonic remarks about a topic made fun of all the g** d*** time, please continue to do so. Whatever floats your boat.

 Ebert said:

The aliens here have chest cavities that open to extrude three-fingered hands, slimy with mucus. One shudders to envision the use of these limbs during sex.

You're right, twooffour.  I'm totally reading too much into this.  I don't know how I leapt to the conclusion that this guy has creepy sex on his mind no matter what the subject matter.

It's all how you read it, I guess.

*eye roll*

twooffour said:

 

<snip>

You realize that those kind of comments were in 100% of his reviews I read?  It's not like one little sardonic comment and I'm flying off the handle.  It was in 5 of the 5 reviews that I read.

I don't recall him being so fixated back when I used to read him more regularly.  It was something new- I found it odd.  I thought some people here might appreciate the oddity.

Many apologies if I've somehow touched a nerve here.

Most of those movies are so shitty they needed some boobage to make them watchable.  Hell, halfway through Pirates 4 I gave up watching anything other than Penelope Cruz.

I guess what I'm saying is... I see where he's coming from.