Ebert is the best but he is certainly not infallible. He belittles the photography but then states "Which is not to say it isn't great to look at. It is."
He belittles the intricacies of the first heist which is ridiculous since McQueen nearly planned the perfect bank robbery even to the point of knowing every phone number amongst a row of phone booths only to be identified by a very attractive woman, extremely skilled at her job that does not play by the rules. The complexity of McQueen's character, which is part of the picture's character development that zooms right over Ebert's head, is here is a rich and successful businessman that has it all. However, he does not enjoy the corporate lifestyle, he is a rebel. He wants to have some real fun so he meticulously plans a caper and seemingly pulls it off without a hitch.
The relationship between McQueen and Dunaway is not your typical love affair. She is out to bust McQueen so it's more like a cat-and-mouse game which is extremely interesting to watch especially because of the great chemistry between two of Hollywood's biggest stars. Ebert misses this as well.
I agree the theme song is way too flower-power trippy and should never have been included nor a musical score that is based on that tune but it did win an Academy Award.
The split screen came about more as a necessity than the film editor being "pointless". There was too much film in the can that needed to be included to tell the story properly but the studio, as studios almost always do, interfered with the art of making a motion picture and desired a shorter feature.
McQueen never strains, as in the Sixties, he is still the icon of coolness. All I read in the comment about Dunaway is jealousy.
The ending is classic. Sorry Roger, not one of your better reviews.
reply
share