EbertFilter January 24, 2011 10:32 AM   Subscribe

There have been three Ebert posts (not even counting this one) in the last four days. Typically aren't people encouraged to fold these kinds of links to existing discussions?
posted by hermitosis to MetaFilter-Related at 10:32 AM (88 comments total)

If Roger Ebert and Lady Gaga somehow combined, the blue would implode.
posted by phunniemee at 10:36 AM on January 24, 2011 [2 favorites]


Double
posted by crunchland at 10:37 AM on January 24, 2011 [4 favorites]


That second one doesn't seem to be primarily about Ebert, although the mere mention of his name, even in passing, is often enough to make the ensuing thread all about EBERT YAY AMIRITE? (Not that I disagree with that sentiment.) That third one did make me think, "Oh, come on, we were just talking about Ebert a couple of days ago."
posted by Gator at 10:38 AM on January 24, 2011


er. Triple.
posted by crunchland at 10:38 AM on January 24, 2011


Yeah usually we'd be telling people "hey there's an open Ebert post" To be honest I didn't see any of the three you linked because not a single person flagged them. If they were the usual "Hey Ebert made another blog update!" I think we'd be seeing some backlash, but since they're all nominally on separate topics

- new chin
- the best single film criticism site
- 3-D film stuff

they have jumping off points that aren't just "what Ebert thinks" and, unlike Lady Gaga, there really aren't a bunch of people saying "Fuck that guy, there's too much of him here" which would lead to more flagging and mod attention. Just my $.02 on this one.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:39 AM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


I'd like to see more posts about filberts.
posted by box at 10:42 AM on January 24, 2011 [7 favorites]


Well I know that the best course of action is aversion, so I haven't been commenting in those threads, but I'm not particularly a fan of his and IMO there's too much of him here.

I can't actually imagine anyone I am a fan of who I think would warrant so much front page attention in such a short span.
posted by hermitosis at 10:44 AM on January 24, 2011


Topo Gigio?
posted by Meatbomb at 10:47 AM on January 24, 2011 [2 favorites]


Fuck that guy, there's too much of him here.

seriously.
posted by msconduct at 10:47 AM on January 24, 2011


not a single person flagged them. --- After I got the reaction I did with that meta I made about Ebert, I learned to keep my mouth shut about him, since he's venerated around here. And I'm pretty sure you go straight to Hell if you badmouth him.
posted by crunchland at 10:48 AM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


Fuck that guy, there's too much of him here.

And he didn't like BLUE VELVET.
posted by philip-random at 10:49 AM on January 24, 2011


But he LOVED Garfield.
posted by crunchland at 10:52 AM on January 24, 2011


*thumbs down*
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:54 AM on January 24, 2011


I'm pretty sure you go straight to Hell if you badmouth him.

Flagging is a completely invisible way to express to the mod team that someone should take a look at something. Many posts get at least a flag or two for various reasons. The fact that there are three posts on a similar topic with no flags whatsoever just implies strongly to us that no one, out of all the many irritable MeFites who will flag stuff for an errant apostrophe, felt this hit the level of "maybe a mod needs to do something about this."

I'm shruggo on Ebert personally and I think he's one of the more overdone topics around here, but these three posts seemed sufficietly different that I don't think people had that "Guh, not another Ebert post" reaction.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:56 AM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


Topo Gigio?

Topo GIGIO!

We would have accepted Kukla, Fran, and Ollie also.
posted by octobersurprise at 10:58 AM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


I think people often rush to post things about people like Gaga and Ebert whom "mefites love!" because they see it as a sort of sure thing, posting-wise. But often those posts are kind of lazy and not good (and I don't think these particular Ebert ones aren't really like that). Same with the inverse, people like Palin whom mefites love to hate. There can be too much of a good (as well as bad) thing.
posted by hermitosis at 10:58 AM on January 24, 2011


I hate to say it, but "Garfield" was nominally watchable. So was "Cats Vs Dogs". This is either the result of incipient middle age, or being a parent. Or both.
posted by KokuRyu at 10:59 AM on January 24, 2011


Bleh, that was unclear -- I don't think these Ebert posts are the lazy/not good kind.
posted by hermitosis at 11:00 AM on January 24, 2011


"I'm pretty sure you go straight to Hell if you badmouth him."

Siskell badmouthed him. Once.
posted by klangklangston at 11:00 AM on January 24, 2011 [8 favorites]


unlike Lady Gaga, there really aren't a bunch of people saying "Fuck that guy, there's too much of him here"

Well, that would make sense because I believe it's been conclusively proven that Lady Gaga is, in fact, not a guy.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 11:06 AM on January 24, 2011


Strokes new chin thoughtfully...
posted by fixedgear at 11:13 AM on January 24, 2011


As Jimi Hendrix once said: " 'Scuse me, while I fuck that guy". And that's how I feel about Dilbert.
posted by the quidnunc kid at 11:14 AM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


What's the right flag for "is a new FPP necessary each time Site X changes?" or is this a "use the contact form" situation?
posted by catlet at 11:20 AM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


*Throws key to private screening*

Critique Roger, CRITIQUE MEEEEEEEEE!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:20 AM on January 24, 2011


crunchland: "not a single person flagged them. --- After I got the reaction I did with that meta I made about Ebert, I learned to keep my mouth shut about him, since he's venerated around here. And I'm pretty sure you go straight to Hell if you badmouth him"

Woah, really? Isn't he the guy who said video games can't be art? Cause fuck that guy.
posted by Grither at 11:21 AM on January 24, 2011


What's the right flag for "is a new FPP necessary each time Site X changes?" or is this a "use the contact form" situation?

I use double post but maybe that is too subtle.

For instance, yet another Big Picture post.
posted by smackfu at 11:22 AM on January 24, 2011


"I don't think these Ebert posts are the lazy/not good kind."

Then I don't think we should discourage them. They aren't doubles (I realize that is subjective) and they are quality posts. The comments may have steered them all in the same direction, but that's not the fault of the posters.
posted by soelo at 11:26 AM on January 24, 2011


What's the right flag for "is a new FPP necessary each time Site X changes?"

That should be a new flag, but I'd go with a shorter name. We could call it "OKCupid Blog." (Though I wish the deleted FPP on the OKCupid Blog post about male users' opinions of women's attractiveness had stayed up so we could have pointed out how incorrect it was.)
posted by John Cohen at 11:28 AM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


And he didn't like BLUE VELVET.

He's been pretty up-front about his blown calls.

He has officially regretted calling the soundtrack to The Graduate "instantly forgettable".
posted by Joe Beese at 11:35 AM on January 24, 2011


Just for the hell of it....

Obama / 661 matches (not just on him, also on anything his administration has done.)

Ebert / 121 matches

Dick Cheney / 101 matches

Palin / 101 matches

Gaiman / 77 matches

Wikileaks / 57 Matches

mathowie / 44 matches

Doctorow / 37 matches

Zuckerberg / 10 matches
posted by zarq at 11:37 AM on January 24, 2011 [2 favorites]


A blogging film critic has been referenced in FPPs 18% as much as the President of the United States.
posted by John Cohen at 11:44 AM on January 24, 2011


Anyone read what Ebert said about Minecraft?
posted by Ad hominem at 11:47 AM on January 24, 2011


John Cohen: "A blogging film critic has been referenced in FPPs 18% as much as the President of the United States."

Well, to be fair, Ebert's been in the public consciousness longer. The first reference to him was made in 2000. The first mention of then-Senator Obama in an FPP or comment was in 2004.
posted by zarq at 11:49 AM on January 24, 2011


Well, to be fair, Ebert's been in the public consciousness longer.

Well, also to be fair, Obama circa 2007-2008 had a more profound resonance in the public consciousness than the typical frontrunner presidential candidate does.
posted by John Cohen at 11:52 AM on January 24, 2011


Ebert's a dinosaur. I have no idea why he has the influence he does.
posted by 2bucksplus at 11:52 AM on January 24, 2011


As I get older, I don't much care for "Blue Velvet" anymore either.
posted by Burhanistan at 11:55 AM on January 24, 2011


John Cohen: " Well, also to be fair, Obama circa 2007-2008 had a more profound resonance in the public consciousness than the typical frontrunner presidential candidate does."

True!

Also: just two years and two days ago:
You know what I love? The fact that Obama is now the president of the US. You know what I don't love? The fact that he also appears to be the president of the front page of the blue.

As of this writing, the word "Obama" appears on the front page some 14 times, in 7 different posts. I'm as happy as anybody else about this, but enough already. Please.

posted by zarq at 11:57 AM on January 24, 2011


Also, may i just point out one of my all time favorite comments from ColdChef in that post?
posted by zarq at 12:01 PM on January 24, 2011 [2 favorites]


I'm waiting for Allie Brosh of Hyperbole and a Half to write her first screenplay, with Lady Gaga providing the soundtrack and Ebert the first adulatory review. Dibs, motherfuckers!
posted by maudlin at 12:31 PM on January 24, 2011 [6 favorites]


I do not understand why some users on this site have such an incredibly difficult time skipping posts they are not interested in and insist on either shitting in those threads or starting Meta posts about them.
posted by NoraReed at 12:32 PM on January 24, 2011 [5 favorites]


Herzog / 26 matches

And I still haven't bothered to read his wikipedia page and figure out who he is. He makes documentary films and talks funny right? Also he saved somebody's life or killed somebody or something? I don't know. Took me longer to type that out than it would have taken to see what the deal is with this guy but whatevs.
posted by ND¢ at 12:34 PM on January 24, 2011


Cthulhu / 41 matches.

Y'all must really like this guy. I don't know, sounds foreign.
posted by ND¢ at 12:38 PM on January 24, 2011 [2 favorites]


If you haven't at least watched all of Herzog's movies featuring Kinski, then drop whatever you're doing and fix that.
posted by Burhanistan at 12:38 PM on January 24, 2011 [3 favorites]


People toss the word epic around pretty casually. You might want to watch Fitzcaraldo and Burden of Dreams. Them are some epic movies.

I do not understand why some users on this site have such an incredibly difficult time skipping MeTa posts they are not interested in.
posted by fixedgear at 12:42 PM on January 24, 2011 [3 favorites]


I do not understand why some users on this site have such an incredibly difficult time skipping posts they are not interested in and insist on either shitting in those threads or starting Meta posts about them.

It's like raaaaaaain on your wedding day...
posted by 2bucksplus at 12:43 PM on January 24, 2011 [5 favorites]


I will say one thing about the frequency of Ebert-related posts: before too long, that number will drop to nearly zero per annum. So either be patient or enjoy it while you've got it, I guess.
posted by adipocere at 12:45 PM on January 24, 2011 [6 favorites]


I don't know what "shuggo" means.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 12:47 PM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


Alanis Morrissette / 5 matches

And the first one has an Ebert quote as the title of the post.
posted by ND¢ at 12:47 PM on January 24, 2011


Shuggo / 0 matches
posted by ND¢ at 12:48 PM on January 24, 2011


Alanis Morrissette / 5 matches

And the first one has an Ebert quote as the title of the post.


Who would have thought, it figures?
posted by 2bucksplus at 12:49 PM on January 24, 2011


noisemachine / 1 match. Soon to be two.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:51 PM on January 24, 2011


Interestingly enough, the tags tell a different story.

Obama: 417 tags

Ebert / 43 tags

Dick Cheney / 92 tags (140 tagged with "cheney")

Palin / 50 tags

Gaiman / 18 tags

Wikileaks / 47 tags

mathowie / 26 tags

Doctorow / 5 tags (BoingBoing gets 41)

Zuckerberg / 0 tags. But "facebook" gets 133.
posted by zarq at 1:02 PM on January 24, 2011


I don't know what "shuggo" means.

But do you know what "shruggo" means?

but these three posts seemed sufficietly different that I don't think people had that "Guh, not another Ebert post" reaction.

Gonna have to disagree with you there, Jessamyn. I'm sick to death of reading about Roger Ebert but I've never flagged a post because I was sick of the topic, so...
posted by iconomy at 1:05 PM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


I suppose I should memail fishbike this question, but does anyone know what the most popular tag is on Mefi? The cloud isn't really designed to let you pick it out easily. Music has 5079. Art has 4192. History has 3306. Sex only has 778. Batshitinsane has 577.....
posted by zarq at 1:07 PM on January 24, 2011


Shuggo
posted by cashman at 1:17 PM on January 24, 2011


I do not understand why some users on this site have such an incredibly difficult time skipping posts they are not interested in

THE YUKON, 1897

INT: Mountie Office
Do-Right: Now let me get this straight. You diverted an entire river through the assayer's office?
Whiplash: Of course! To reap the rewards of the goldfields, one merely has to deliver gold to the assayer's office, who assesses the appropriate value. Untold amounts of alluvial gold flows in the mighty Klondike River, and all of it went into that office! I do not understand why the assayers have such an incredibly difficult time skipping water, mud, boulders, and large trees they are not interested in.
EXT: Nell and Horse are swept away in the torrent.

posted by zamboni at 1:18 PM on January 24, 2011 [3 favorites]


You're all forgetting a big MeFi "free throw" subject:

The Muppets = 82 posts
posted by briank at 1:37 PM on January 24, 2011


Zuckerberg / 0 tags. But "facebook" gets 133.

I read this continually as Zoidberg...and wondering what he had to do with Facebook.

(FYI, the Decapod doctor has actually been tagged two times more than the boy billionaire, which shows us that, love or meh Ebert, we, overall, have our priorities in order.)
posted by MCMikeNamara at 1:38 PM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


I don't know what "shuggo" means.

But do you know what "shruggo" means?


Shuggo-th
posted by The Michael The at 1:54 PM on January 24, 2011


I'm pretty sure what we're suffering from is technically called "The Ebert Glut."
posted by crunchland at 2:26 PM on January 24, 2011


I am responsible for the latest Ebert post. I actually find it kind of annoying that he is linked so often, too, as I'm not a huge fan, but I thought Walter Murch's take on 3D cinema was interesting enough to warrant its own post. I saw the previous Ebert post and considered posting there, but it didn't fit. Had I realized there was a second previous Ebert post, I might have reconsidered. But I think the post has gone pretty well anyway.
posted by oulipian at 2:43 PM on January 24, 2011


If you haven't at least watched all of Herzog's movies featuring Kinski, then drop whatever you're doing and fix that.

The only thing more important than doing this is hearing Scody's Herzog impressions.
posted by FelliniBlank at 3:24 PM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


the Decapod doctor

He's a Biped.
posted by Sys Rq at 4:32 PM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


I think the first two could fold together, but I'm with the person who said that the 3D post was more of a Walter Munch post.
posted by Eideteker at 4:38 PM on January 24, 2011


He makes documentary films and talks funny right? Also he saved somebody's life or killed somebody or something?

There is a film of him eating his own shoe. He pulled Joachim Phoenix from a burning car. He was shot by a sniper during an interview, continued the interview while bleeding from his abdomen and said it was no big deal because it wasn't a very large bullet. He jumped on to a cactus to motivate his cast and still has cactus spines embedded in his body. He starred in "Julien Donkey Boy".
posted by Ad hominem at 4:39 PM on January 24, 2011 [5 favorites]


Oh, it's "shruggo". I can guess what that means, despite evidently having suffered some sort of neurological trauma that has rendered me incapable of reading simple English.

The scary part is that I actually went back and looked over jessamyn's comment again before I posted mine and I still saw it as "shuggo".

Great. Dain bramage.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 5:04 PM on January 24, 2011


Sluggo / 1 match

Metafilter obviously doesn't deserve this badge. Which is weird because we have so much in common with that weirdly spotted potato headed gargoyle creature.
posted by ND¢ at 5:21 PM on January 24, 2011


The irony of a new chin.
posted by clavdivs at 5:29 PM on January 24, 2011


El Internet es hecho de Topo Gigio con gatos.
posted by SomeTrickPony at 5:54 PM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


Great. Dain bramage.

Nah, I edited it after the fact to bother ND¢ because I am secretly an adolescent.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:19 PM on January 24, 2011 [1 favorite]


And I still haven't bothered to read his wikipedia page and figure out who he is

I did the research for you. It appears he was the winner of "Survivor China".
posted by TheShadowKnows at 8:39 PM on January 24, 2011


I'd like to see more posts about filberts.

No, because that would be just nuts...
posted by Slap*Happy at 9:33 PM on January 24, 2011


Filberts = hazelnuts. Discuss.
posted by fixedgear at 4:54 AM on January 25, 2011


Hazelnut = any species of Corylis. Filbert = Corylis maxima. Me = pedant from western Oregon.
posted by catlet at 6:51 AM on January 25, 2011 [1 favorite]


and also a misspelling pre-caffeine pedant since it's Corylus.
posted by catlet at 6:52 AM on January 25, 2011


How fucking dare anyone out there make fun of Roger after all he has been through!

He lost his voice, he lost his chin. He had two fucking kids.

HE’S A HUMAN! (ah! ooh!) What you don’t realize is that Roger is making you all this money and all you do is write a bunch of crap about him.

He hasn’t performed on TV in years. LEAVE HIM ALONE! You are lucky he even performed for you BASTARDS!

LEAVE ROGER EBERT ALONE!…..Please... I mean it.
posted by Naberius at 7:33 AM on January 25, 2011


It's a great day for the Sun to suddenly swell and absorb the Earth.
posted by Burhanistan at 7:37 AM on January 25, 2011


I noticed the three Ebert-peripheral posts (as opposed to Ebert-centric posts) but thought nothing of it. Admiration for Ebert seems to be an evergreen topic on mefi, along with analysis of Alien (and its sequels) and WTFPALIN posts.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:50 AM on January 25, 2011


> They aren't doubles (I realize that is subjective) and they are quality posts.

I agree with this, and I think starting a MeTa thread because you don't like somebody and want to see fewer posts about them is a shitty idea. I'm not interested in a large percentage of the posts on the front page, and you know what I do? I ignore them. Try it sometime; it works surprisingly well.
posted by languagehat at 8:24 AM on January 25, 2011


Isn't he the guy who said video games can't be art?

that's right, and then his fucking chin fell off.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 8:43 AM on January 25, 2011 [1 favorite]


Ugh.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:47 AM on January 25, 2011


Sorry, can someone explain qII's post to me, because it sounds an awful lot like, "I'm going to make fun of his horrendous cancer complications because I disagree with his opinion on X." Is that really the gist of that?
posted by neuromodulator at 10:19 AM on January 25, 2011 [2 favorites]


Yeah, I think that's what it was. Hilarious, huh?
posted by John Cohen at 10:22 AM on January 25, 2011


A more charitable read of that, if one is possible, is that he was making some obtuse joke about the subjects of Ebert threads, not so much poking fun at his condition. It's seriously out of tune in either case, but I'm thinking it's the less nefarious version.
posted by Burhanistan at 10:23 AM on January 25, 2011


GaGa / 50 posts. ONLY 50!!

What the fuckshit. 121 Eberts and only 50 GaGa's?

GET TO WORK PEOPLE!!
posted by cavalier at 10:28 AM on January 25, 2011


neuromodulator: "Sorry, can someone explain qII's post to me, because it sounds an awful lot like, "I'm going to make fun of his horrendous cancer complications because I disagree with his opinion on X." Is that really the gist of that"

He must have forgotten that schadenfreude is strictly forbidden at metafilter.
posted by Grither at 11:19 AM on January 25, 2011


I thought it was just a silly joke in the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" school of humor, and it got a small chuckle out of me. Ebert would probably find it chuckle-worthy too.
posted by Gator at 11:33 AM on January 25, 2011


Come on, it's quonsar. Your sacred cow is his pissing elephant.
posted by crunchland at 12:17 PM on January 25, 2011


« Older Vague medical AskMe questions   |   When should I ask my question? Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments