<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Defamer Australia &#187; roger ebert</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.defamer.com.au/tags/roger-ebert/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.defamer.com.au</link>
	<description>Celebrity Gossip and Pop Culture from Australia and Hollywood</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:35:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>What Loudmouth Movie Critic Bashed the &#8216;Old Putz&#8217; His Son Was Hired to Replace?</title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/what_loudmouth_movie_critic_bashed_the_old_putz_his_son_was_hired_to_replace-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/what_loudmouth_movie_critic_bashed_the_old_putz_his_son_was_hired_to_replace-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:40:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>STV</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ben lyons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blind items]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jeffrey lyons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/what_loudmouth_movie_critic_bashed_the_old_putz_his_son_was_hired_to_replace-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A tipster wasn&#8217;t naming names when s/he sent word of one film critic&#8217;s rather vocal dissing of another, more &#8220;highly respected&#8221; critic at a press screening eariler this afternoon. But the math seems easy enough, even for us: A father, a son and a &#8220;pathetic old putz&#8221; who&#8217;s no longer on the air? Show your [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/what_loudmouth_movie_critic_bashed_the_old_putz_his_son_was_hired_to_replace-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Roger Ebert Likens Himself to Non-Schumacher Phantom of the Opera</title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/roger_ebert_likens_himself_to_nonschumacher_phantom_of_the_opera-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/roger_ebert_likens_himself_to_nonschumacher_phantom_of_the_opera-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/roger_ebert_likens_himself_to_nonschumacher_phantom_of_the_opera-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since Roger Ebert&#8217;s return to writing after the 2006 thyroid surgery that left him without part of his jawbone, he&#8217;s been a notably more adventurous scribe, unafraid to toss off deadpan satire, rice cooker meditations, and a good Ben Lyons slam now and then. Now, though, after a thoughtful essay on the internal, decay-obsessed Synecdoche, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/roger_ebert_likens_himself_to_nonschumacher_phantom_of_the_opera-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/high_on_pot_roger_eberts_been_on_such_a_-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/high_on_pot_roger_eberts_been_on_such_a_-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 16:28:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/high_on_pot_roger_eberts_been_on_such_a_-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[High on Pot: Roger Ebert&#8217;s been on such a unhinged roll as of late (slamming Ben Lyons, posting creationism parodies, and handing out eight-minute reviews) that one may wonder, what&#8217;s been eating him? Now, Ebert has taken to his blog with the answer: it&#8217;s not what&#8217;s eating him, it&#8217;s what he&#8217;s eating, and what&#8217;s he&#8217;s [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/11/high_on_pot_roger_eberts_been_on_such_a_-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ben Lyons Gleans Valuable Starfucking Tips From Roger Ebert</title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/ben_lyons_gleans_valuable_starfucking_tips_from_roger_ebert-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/ben_lyons_gleans_valuable_starfucking_tips_from_roger_ebert-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:34:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>STV</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ben lyons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[critics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/ben_lyons_gleans_valuable_starfucking_tips_from_roger_ebert-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Always the type of man to make the best of a bad situation, Roger Ebert has now spun his recent Reviewgate scandal into a deeply constructive thesis on movie critic ethics. And by &#8220;deeply constructive,&#8221; we mean &#8220;a point-by-point indictment of Ben Lyons&#8221; &#8212; that proven archenemy of taste, restraint and decorum in an ever-thinning [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/ben_lyons_gleans_valuable_starfucking_tips_from_roger_ebert-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Roger Ebert Regrets Reviewing Movie He Only Watched For 8 Minutes</title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/roger_ebert_regrets_reviewing_movie_he_only_watched_for_8_minutes-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/roger_ebert_regrets_reviewing_movie_he_only_watched_for_8_minutes-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[short films]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tru loved]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/roger_ebert_regrets_reviewing_movie_he_only_watched_for_8_minutes-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Roger Ebert survived a battle with thyroid and salivary gland cancer with his prodigious mind still intact, but ever since his notorious binder-thwacking at the hands of Lou Lumenick, things have been a little&#8230; askew. First, Rog stumped his audience with an ode to creationism that seemed more appropriate for Free Republic than the Chicago [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/roger_ebert_regrets_reviewing_movie_he_only_watched_for_8_minutes-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Older, White Critics Have Missed the Boat on &#8216;Rachel Getting Married&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/how_older_white_critics_have_missed_the_boat_on_rachel_getting_married-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/how_older_white_critics_have_missed_the_boat_on_rachel_getting_married-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:09:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anne hathaway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anthony lane]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jeffrey wells]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[owen gleiberman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rachel getting married]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[top]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/how_older_white_critics_have_missed_the_boat_on_rachel_getting_married-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Most of the attention paid to Jonathan Demme&#8217;s new film Rachel Getting Married has centered on the Oscar-buzzed lead performance from Anne Hathaway, but many critics are consumed with something the movie treats as a non-event: the fact that the titular Rachel (Rosemarie DeWitt) is marrying a black man, Sidney (Tunde Adebimpe of the band [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/10/how_older_white_critics_have_missed_the_boat_on_rachel_getting_married-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/roger_ebert_wise_guy_despite_getting_our_-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/roger_ebert_wise_guy_despite_getting_our_-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>STV</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[two thumbs down]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/roger_ebert_wise_guy_despite_getting_our_-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Roger Ebert, Wise Guy: Despite getting our hands on the damning outtakes of the critic&#8217;s recent Q&#038;A explaining Creationism, we allowed for the possibility that the whole episode might have just been an elaborate, tongue-in-cheek statement about people&#8217;s eagerness to believe anything they see, hear or read. Right on cue, the crafty Ebert confirmed our [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/roger_ebert_wise_guy_despite_getting_our_-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Roger Ebert&#8217;s Creationism Q&amp;A: The Outtakes</title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/roger_eberts_creationism_qa_the_outtakes-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/roger_eberts_creationism_qa_the_outtakes-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>STV</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[and god created ebert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/roger_eberts_creationism_qa_the_outtakes-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Following the recent, violent critical confrontation from which he barely escaped alive, Roger Ebert appears to have adopted a generous new perspective on both his life (Lou Lumenick, forgiven) and his work (The Women, three stars). Nowhere is the New Ebert more conspicuous than in his fascinating tutorial about Creationism, which, he argues in his [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/roger_eberts_creationism_qa_the_outtakes-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/though_roger_ebert_would_rather_his_thwacking_-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/though_roger_ebert_would_rather_his_thwacking_-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 22:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lou lumenick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tiff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[toronto film festival]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/though_roger_ebert_would_rather_his_thwacking_-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Though Roger Ebert would rather his thwacking at the hands of Lou Lumenick be forgotten, it seems that New York Post readers aren&#8217;t as quick to forgive. Lumenick&#8217;s last Toronto Film Festival update neglects to mention the incident (instead focusing on an Anne Hathaway/Keira Knightley Oscar showdown), but every single commenter rips into him anyway, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/though_roger_ebert_would_rather_his_thwacking_-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/tiff_tiff_update_via_mcn_weve_learned_-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/tiff_tiff_update_via_mcn_weve_learned_-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:19:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Defamer Hollywood</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lou lumenick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new york post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roger ebert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tiff 2008]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[toronto film festival]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/tiff_tiff_update_via_mcn_weve_learned_-2.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[TIFF Tiff Update! Via MCN, we&#8217;ve learned that Roger Ebert has posted to his blog regarding the now-notorious thwacking he received at the hands of NY Post critic Lou Lumenick. Titled &#8220;An Incident at Toronto,&#8221; Ebert confirms the NY Daily News account of the dustup, but adds that he wishes it had never been made [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.defamer.com.au/2008/09/tiff_tiff_update_via_mcn_weve_learned_-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
