Ebert’s Not the Only Idiot

I don’t know why I torture myself like this, but lately I’ve been reading a lot of film reviews online. I’ve also been reading a lot of scholarly-like film criticism, which is a whole different beast. Even though I didn’t end up agreeing with a lot of what Robin Wood said in his book (Hollywood from Vietnam to Reagan), he was at least critically engaged with the material. He took what other, more popular critics wrote into account, and then actually took the time to think it all through and formulate his own theories on separate genres/works/directors. Besides Jonathan Rosenbaum, I can’t think of any popular film critic writing today that comes close to this kind of writing – at least consistently.

Part of that is the nature of the beast, and I get that. Obviously Wood had a little bit more time planning out and re-editing the articles for his book, whereas a film critic generally has to write her review the next day or sooner. It’s a hard job, especially when you’re in the film festival environment, seeing five or six movies a day. So my complaint is more along the lines of…what’s the point? Most of us already know what we’re going to like anyway…I mean, are our choices of which films to go see really dictated by what the critics are saying about a specific film, or are we just going to go see Transformers 2 because we like big, awesome robots? And then, if we’re inclined to read the reviews after watching the movie, is this just a way to validate our own opinions that we’ve already started to form? Cement them in our minds so we can be closed off to any alternative criticism? Convince us that Inglourious Basterds was, indeed, “boring” and we can just throw it away like every other piece of pointless entertainment?


rogerebertThere were a few articles I read lately that inspired an even deeper hatred of popular film reviews than I already had. Ebert’s review of A Clockwork Orange has to be one of the worst pieces of criticism I’ve read. At least it’s the worst piece from someone who is considered respectable. (He is considered that, right? He has a lot of books…) In summary, Ebert feels that A Clockwork Orange is a “right-wing film” that “celebrates violence”  by claiming that the “hero,” whom “Kubrick likes very much” and thinks is “normal,” is not created by a violent society but is created by a violent society where he might as well be violent, too. What an idiot. The guy doesn’t even take the time and energy to think into some of the imagery Kubrick has put into his film, and instead passes it off as “cute” and “cheap.” The only pseudo-analysis he is willing to go into completely ignores content in favor of form. Not that any of this matters, because in the end the most important thing to Ebert is that the movie was “boring.”

“Boring” is a word that keeps cropping up in every negative review I read lately. This has especially annoyed me in reference to Antichrist. Now, I haven’t seen the movie, but can graphic sex, violence, and a full-on vagina shot really be considered “boring”? Ok, maybe it can, but in a Von Trier movie??? Maybe we should reevaluate the use of the word! 

It’s the quickness and stubbornness of the opinions in popular film criticism that is really ridiculous. Why must we be so unwavering in our opinions on what can always be complicated works of art? Yes, some of that art is shit, but isn’t it always saying something? Someone put a lot of time into that shit, maybe we shouldn’t bash it/praise it so quickly in a three-hundred word review.


That said, I do it all the time. On this blog, on Facebook, and especially when I’m writing for Film Threat. Being outraged or overjoyed is fun. I’m about to write a really engaging review of The Final Destination in 3D, so who am I to judge?



Filed under Whitney

6 responses to “Ebert’s Not the Only Idiot

  1. Remember how mad you used to get at me when I would say I generally didn’t like action movies because I thought they were boring? Your issues with that word have a long history.

    • Right. I think you can get bored watching a movie that isn’t boring. And I think getting bored is, a lot of time, up to the viewer, and no fault of the filmmaker. These critics just assume that if they’re bored with a certain scene, than the film is automatically “boring.”

  2. this is something i think about quite a bit. especially with my own “reviews” on this site.

    my question: can any review move outside a specific perspective (the viewer’s)?

    in other words, if ebert or who(m)ever calls a movie boring (or funny, which seems to be the adjective i use most to describe movies), is (s)he saying anything other than i found the movie boring? and, if that’s true, does it mean anything other than so and so thought this movie was boring (funny)? more importantly, what if we each have different definitions of boring (funny)?

    i weak (in the philosophical sense) out of this is to say movie reviews are more like conversations that represent a multiplicity of viewpoints. i think.

    • I think that’s a good point. So I wish more reviewers would treat it like a conversation and not so static and authoritative. I wish that film reviews could always be really fluid and tentative, I guess. We know that their viewpoint is within their perspective, but I feel that a lot of the critics don’t.

      I’ve been thinking about your idea of just writing notes down on paper and scanning them into the blog for your review. I love it.

  3. “Now, I haven’t seen the movie, but can graphic sex, violence, and a full-on vagina shot really be considered “boring”? Ok, maybe it can, but in a Von Trier movie???”

    Maybe not, but can can be considered “tedious”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s