Roger's little rule book - Roger Ebert's Journal

Roger's little rule book

(Roger Ebert offers advice to young film critics.)

I disagree strongly with one of his points. This one: "Advise the readers well. This does not involve informing them, "You'll love this!" If I approached some guy in a restaurant and told him what he would love, I might get a breadbasket in the face. No, we must tell the readers what we ourselves love or hate."

In my opinion, this is exactly why more and more film critics are being laid off. We don't care what they think of the movie. That is simply a matter of their personal tastes and biases. I have given a great deal of thought to this matter over the years, and have found that I do not agree with great critics any more than I agree with bad ones. I read a movie review to find out what I would think of the movie. Therefore, although their opinion is irrelevant, their description is critically important.

Ebert does not seem to understand that he is not a great film critic because of his learned opinions, but because he is an excellent writer with great descriptive skills. It is possible to read one of his glowing reviews and realize that he is, in fact, describing an unwatchable movie that happened to connect with him in some way. It is also possible to enjoy his reviews when they are ill-considered, because he has such sophisticated writing abilities. I've often cited his review of Lost and Delirious. He praised a sophomoric and atrociously bad film, but it is nonetheless one of the best reviews I have ever read because: (1) the writing is beautiful and eloquent - far better than the puerile writing in the actual film; (2) the descriptions are accurate enough, and his biases are apparent enough, that a reader may determine that the movie sucks even while Ebert is praising it.

Having thus praised Caesar, I also wish to bury him with an example. It is not possible for me to like a non-comedy film in which people rip out the internal organs of others and consume them. I don't care if it is written by Charlie Kaufman (Eternal Sunshine) and directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet (Amelie), with glorious nude scenes from the Jessicas, Biel and Alba. I will hate it. Therefore, if I follow Ebert's advice, my reviews of Italian cannibal films would have no value at all. "We must tell the readers what we ourselves love or hate." OK, I hate every Italian cannibal film. I can tell you that before the lights go down. That's a given. So how can the reader determine whether he would like it, assuming he likes some in that genre and hates others? It is clear that my opinion is irrelevant. I must find a way to tell him whether he would like a film, or there is no reason for him to read my review in the first place.

Because so many critics follow Ebert's advice, they have simply become irrelevant to their readers, and are therefore being fired because they draw a salary while adding no financial value to the newspapers they write for. (Unless, of course, they are just so entertaining that people will buy the Friday paper just to read their columns. I would buy our local Friday paper if The Filthy Critic wrote all the film reviews. But I still wouldn't care whether he liked the movies.)