Roger Ebert was known for his discerning taste and exacting standards. Even celebrated films such as “Gladiator,” “Raising Arizona,” and “A Clockwork Orange” found themselves in the lower spectrum of his four-star rating system. Ebert described “Fight Club” as “pandering” and dismissed “Jumanji” as a “gloomy special-effects extravaganza filled with grotesque images.” Securing a perfect four-star review from Ebert was a significant achievement, especially in genres often criticized for low-quality entries.
Yet, much like his appreciation for exceptional horror films, Ebert also recognized some of the finest action movies across different film eras. Movies like “Salt,” “The Fugitive,” and “Speed” joined the ranks of those that received his highest praise, alongside unconventional action-infused films such as “Avatar” and “Inception.” Let’s delve into five action-packed films that earned Ebert’s coveted four-star rating and explore why they captured the acclaim of such a discerning critic in their respective times.
Steve McQueen was a screen icon, and his performance in “Bullitt” deservedly earned a four-star review from Roger Ebert. Released in 1968, “Bullitt” embodies the quintessential elements of a classic cop movie from that period. Although the storyline follows a conventional narrative of mobsters pushing their luck and determined officers stopping them, McQueen’s charisma shines through. However, it is director Peter Yates’ masterful execution, particularly the film’s legendary car chase finale, that continues to garner praise.
In 1968, Ebert declared “Bullitt” “the best action movie of recent years,” a notable accolade considering it was released during an era that included “Thunderball” and John Wayne’s “El Dorado.” The spectacular car chase scene was already the film’s standout moment, even before it became the subject of retrospective acclaim.
Bullitt
Ebert noted, “’Bullitt,’ as everybody has heard by now, also includes a brilliant chase scene.” He vividly described how McQueen, performing his own stunts, engages in a thrilling pursuit with gangsters through the hilly streets of San Francisco. The sequence is packed with collisions, near-misses, and edge-of-your-seat moments that leave viewers breathless for the entire 11-minute duration.
Ebert called the film “the best action movie of recent years” in 1968 — a huge compliment given that those recent years included “Thunderball” and John Wayne’s “El Dorado.” Even back when the movie came out, years before retrospective criticism turned the climax into a museum exhibit, the car chase was already the major point of focus.
“‘Bullitt,’ as everybody has heard by now, also includes a brilliant chase scene,” Ebert wrote in his review. “McQueen (doing his own driving) is chased by, and chases, a couple of gangsters up and down San Francisco’s hills. They slam into intersections, bounce halfway down the next hill, scrape by half a dozen near-misses, sideswipe each other, and leave your stomach somewhere in the basement for about 11 minutes.”
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Who doesn’t love the Indiana Jones movies? Roger Ebert certainly did, giving perfect four-star reviews to the first two films, and only knocking off half a star for “The Last Crusade” and “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” — a rare bit of high praise for the fourth film in the franchise. But his love affair with the action-archeology series began, as it did for most, with “Raiders of the Lost Ark.”
The highest-grossing movie of 1981, “Raiders” became a cultural sensation, evoking the old adventure serials of decades past in the best ways, while establishing one of Harrison Ford’s all-time-defining characters of the decade. “The movie is just plain fun,” Roger Ebert wrote in a retrospective review. And boy was he right.
Ebert praised the effects, the constant momentum, and the retro style of the story. But he had special praise for Ford’s performance when looking back on”Raiders of the Lost Ark.” “Harrison Ford is the embodiment of Indiana Jones — dry, fearless, and as indestructible as a cartoon coyote,” the critic wrote. “In a scene where everything is happening at once, he knows that nothing unnecessary need be happening on his face, in his voice, or to his character. He is the fulcrum, not the lever.” Guess it’s time to watch “Raiders” again.
Iron Man
The modern Marvel Cinematic Universe is a difficult beast to tackle through traditional film criticism. It’s far more interesting to analyze the paradigm shift it stirred in how we engage with movies — for better or worse — and the stranglehold it had on Hollywood. But back at the very beginning, it was just one movie, a movie that got four stars from Roger Ebert.
“Iron Man” was huge in 2008, marking the career revival of Robert Downey Jr. after Hollywood had abandoned him, as well as a new era for comic book movies. The film grossed nearly $600 million worldwide and still holds an impressive 94% critical score on Rotten Tomatoes.
Ebert was one of many who cheered the film on, and his 2008 review is full of high praise. “With many superhero movies, all you get is the surface of the illusion,” Ebert wrote. “With ‘Iron Man,’ you get a glimpse into the depths.” He lauded the special effects work, as well as the performances from Downey, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Jeff Bridges. “Tony Stark is created from the persona Downey has fashioned through many movies: irreverent, quirky, self-deprecating, wise-cracking,” Ebert wrote. “He is strong because he is smart, quick and funny, and because we sense his public persona masks deep private wounds. By building on that, [Jon] Favreau found his movie, and it’s a good one.”
Skyfall
“Skyfall” wasn’t the first James Bond movie to earn a four star rating from Roger Ebert. “Goldfinger” claimed the honor in a retrospective review, and “Casino Royale,” the first to star Daniel Craig, also received a perfect score. But Ebert had particularly high praise for “Skyfall,” which the critic called “the best Bond in years,”
That’s not exactly a hot take. “Skyfall” is widely considered one of the long-running franchise’s crowning achievements — a spectacular turn for Craig and a climactic send-off for Judi Dench’s “M,” with one of the series’ great villain performances from Javier Bardem. It’s also the only James Bond movie to hit $1 billion at the box office. “Skyfall” is frequently included on lists of the top blockbusters and action movies of the 21st century, and the most famed film critic in America agreed with that assessment.
“‘Skyfall’ triumphantly reinvents 007 in one of the best Bonds ever,” Ebert wrote in his review. “I don’t know what I expected in Bond No. 23, but certainly not an experience this invigorating.” Daniel Craig received high praise from Ebert, who said the actor took “full possession” of the role. On M, Ebert wrote that “‘Skyfall’ at last provides a role worthy of Judi Dench, one of the best actors of her generation.” Likening the film to Christopher Nolan’s cinematic reimagining of Batman, Ebert wrote, “Here is James Bond lifted up, dusted off, set back on his feet and ready for another 50 years.”
Lethal Weapon
Warner Bros.
Despite being one of the most popular action movie series of the ’80s and ’90s, “Lethal Weapon” doesn’t get talked about these days the way that contemporaries like “Rambo” or “Die Hard” do. Perhaps that’s just because those franchises have continued to pump out more, generally subpar entries. Perhaps it’s the fact that “Lethal Weapon 3” and “Lethal Weapon 4” just aren’t very good. Or maybe it’s the Mel Gibson factor.
Regardless, those first two are solid actioners, and Roger Ebert had particular love for the original — “a movie where you and your date grab each other’s arm every four minutes and you walk out black and blue and grinning from ear to ear.” Ebert praised the chemistry between Gibson and Danny Glover, but his nod went to director Richard Donner’s overall pacing and dynamism.
“In a sense, a movie like ‘Lethal Weapon’ isn’t about violence at all,” Ebert wrote in one of his more revealing assessments of the entire action genre. “It’s about movement and timing, the choreography of bodies and weapons in time and space. In lesser movies, people stand there and shoot at each other and we’re bored. In a movie with the energy of this one, we’re exhilarated by the sheer freedom of movement; the violence becomes surrealistic and less important than the movie’s underlying energy level.”