'Life Itself' Director Steve James Talks About His Relationship with Roger Ebert
The documentary Life Itself about the late Roger Ebert premieres in limited release on July 4. To celebrate America’s most beloved movie critic, this week we’re looking back on his inimitable life and career and his passionate love for film.
”This is one of the best films about American life that I have ever seen.” So opined Roger Ebert in his first television review of the 1994 high school-basketball documentary Hoop Dreams. The critic’s championing of the movie — directed by a young filmmaker named Steve James — helped it find a distribution deal and become a sleeper hit. Hoop Dreams revived the then-moribund documentary format, and even lead to a change in Academy Award rules following public outrage when it failed to land a best documentary nomination.
So there a fitting bit of symmetry when, 18 years later, Snyder turned his documentary camera on the man who helped launch his career. Life Itself, which opens in theaters on July 4, is a compelling portrait of the late film critic, who died of cancer in 2013.
Yahoo Movies talked to James about the special fondness and regard he had for Ebert and the complicated relationship that exists between critic and filmmaker
You’ve credited Roger with helping jumpstart your career with his praise for Hoop Dreams. What was your personal history with him up until that point?
Well, like a lot of people, I first discovered him on the show. Back then, you couldn’t read [critics] online — you got the newspaper and read it. I was studying film at Southern Illinois University. I happened across the show on a Sunday afternoon and I was, like, This is interesting. I watched for a couple episodes and thought, Who are these guys?’ Oh, they’re from the Chicago Tribune and the Sun-Times. And then, Why would someone put those guys on a show about movies? Because I’m reading film theory, and Chicago’s not a locus for film criticism. At least not then. But I liked the show: It was smart and very entertaining. I just thought it was a great idea, a great way to get a glimpse of films coming out. When I moved to Chicago I started reading Roger regularly. I got the Tribune and the Sun-Times and quickly decided I was more of a Sun-Times guy. Politically, and because of the newspapers, but also the movie section, because Roger would write seven or eight reviews a week. Like big reviews, not little capsules. I was just amazed by his output and the quality of his writing. I became a follower. So when he did review Hoop Dreams, it was someone who I highly prized and respected giving this endorsement to the film.
What did that review mean for you?
I don’t think I’ve ever gotten a better review of a movie I’ve made [laughs]. I started at the top! I mean, I’ve gotten some great reviews over the years, but when he said “It’s one of the great movie-going experiences of my lifetime” — this was from a famous film critic who, at that point, had been writing about film for nearly 30 years.
How much of an impact did his review and support of Hoop Dreams had on the film’s success?
It made a huge difference — and Gene’s review did too. Because they both went on the show and they just talked it up. They first reviewed it when it was only being seen at Sundance. And by that point, that show was huge and was on everywhere. And it was a big deal in the film industry. So you could imagine when they went on, and in their review, they said something like ‘You can only see this film at the Sundance Film Festival this week.’ And they went on to say they really believed this film deserved wider distribution. They knew exactly what they were doing, and they knew exactly what their power was, and they were using it to help this little, three-hour-long documentary go out into the world. They felt so strongly about it, and it made a huge difference. It led directly to us getting distribution for the film. It launched my career. And Roger, over the years, remained a strong critical voice reviewing my films.
Did you ever get a bad review from him?
I never got a bad review from him. The lowest I got was three stars, but got at least a couple other four-star reviews from him. Right up to The Interrupters, which came out three years ago. He banged the drum for that one repeatedly, put it on his best-of-the-year list, and was outraged when we didn’t get shortlisted [for eligibility at the Academy Awards] — and wrote about that. He’s had a big impact.
Do you remember the three-star reviews?
Of course [laughs]. I think I got two three-star reviews. I think I got three stars for Reel Paradise, a film where I follow this family to Fiji to run the world’s most remote movie theater. And the other film — actually I made a film right after The Interrupters, a concussion film called Head Games that he gave three stars to. And it was funny, because he wrote me and told me that his publisher, the Sun-Times, was not going to run this review in the paper, so he’d only be able to run it on his website. At that point it had been made public that I was doing a film on him. And his editor was not going to run the review, because he saw it as a conflict of interest.’ So I emailed back and said, ‘Yeah I understand how that could look.’ But I misread Roger’s attitude toward it. He emailed me back immediately and said, ‘I don’t understand it. They’re impugning my integrity.’
As you show in Life Itself, Roger had some close personal relationships with certain filmmakers.
Yes, unlike most critics. There’s probably someone else that’s done it, but nobody more prominently. Roger developed a friendship with a very small group of filmmakers over the years, three of whom are in the movie: Ramin Bahrani, Gregory Nava and Martin Scorsese. But he felt very strongly that those friendships didn’t compromise his reviewing of their movies. Not everybody agreed, and we have dissenting voices in the film. But I think he felt that that relationship with those filmmakers taught him something about the movies, it taught something about filmmaking, it helped him understand more about the process, because he was really engaged with people who make films, instead of just watching the films.
And where do you stand, what’s your opinion on if that conflict existed?
If you look, he negatively reviewed two of Scorsese’s movies, and we have one of them in the film. And Scorsese is, like, ‘Ouch.’ With Nava, he hasn’t made that many films, but Roger panned one of them. So, I think you could argue that he probably bent over backwards to make sure that he didn’t [show favoritism].
Can you tell us about the first time you guys met?
I met him at the Toronto film festival. Hoop Dreams premiered at Sundance and then it got picked up for distribution to be released in the fall. Leading up to the opening, the distributor played it in Toronto and organized a dinner that Roger attended because he was interested in meeting us. And so I met him. But because of the way the tables were aligned I didn’t get to sit next to him. There were other people there, and so I never really talked to him much. Which was a drag, because I was looking forward to speaking with him, although I was a little scared, too. I was a little intimidated by the whole notion of it, because he was Roger Ebert, and I didn’t want to say something stupid and have him rethink his review. Him thinking, ‘Maybe this guy isn’t very smart after all, maybe I misunderstood that film.’ I also took very seriously what I perceived to be that wall between critics and filmmakers. And it was something that I steadfastly honored until I got to the point that I was making this movie. But I probably only ran into Roger 10 times over the 20 years since I’ve known him, usually at some kind of public thing. When his star was dedicated in Chicago, I went to that. I went up and congratulated him and he was very sweet and generous to me.
So you weren’t one of the filmmakers he got very close to?
I was very careful. I’d email him and tell him I had a film coming out, but I’d keep it very short. I didn’t expect to hear back from him — and I didn’t. He would write the review, but I didn’t get any personal emails. I never attempted to have that kind of friendship that I then read about when I read his memoir. Then I started to feel like, Well, what about me? I’m in Chicago. Maybe he’s just didn’t want to be friendly with me. [Laughs]
Photo: Jason Kempin/Getty Images
