Chill: Ebert's a reviewer, not a critic...what do you expect?

Films/DVD Asylum

Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

168.122.15.158

I'm consistently surprised at how incensed forum participants become over the banal scribblings of the movie scribes at their daily newspapers.
People consistently use the word "critic" when speaking of journalists such as Roger Ebert. This lot are more properly called "reviewers" or consumer reporters. Their "research" comes primarily from the formidable promotion material generated by the studio itself, without which it would be next to impossible to generate a few hundred words on a film they have typically seen but once-- a day or two before their publication deadline. Since this is an audio forum, imagine the outrage by readers of Stereophile if J10 told his audience that he listened to the latest Krell for a only a couple of hours, and regurgitated the manufacturers "white paper" before coming to his conclusions! You should no more expect an intelligent discourse on films in a newspaper than you would expect high-end equipment reviews in the dailies.
Furthermore, does anyone need to be reminded that the dailies movie coverage is intrinsically and inextricably tied to the the studios--those businessmen who promote, bankroll and distribute films; but most importantly buy 5 to10 full-page adverts on a daily basis. Remember also, a major studio/conglomerate owns and produces Roger Ebert's primary national soapbox--his television show. Ebert is no more going to risk his coveted position as a Hollywood flunkie, with it's enviable perks: weekends with Jack in Aspen; house guest at Malibu, and his table at Puck's, et al by slamming his chums films. His occasional nod towards some offensive NY "indie" solidifies his NY street cred...which should garner him a decent seat at Elaine's. A slam or two at Reagan or Charlton Heston might get him an overnight at the Lincoln bedroom....all in all, a few obviously calculated reviews guarantees a happy career trajectory.
Before one gets too heated at the silly, politically-correct ramblings of RE and company, pause and remember their real purpose in a newspaper: to service the management with a pithy quote for the studios which contribute untold millions a year in the movie section of the dailies. And don't forget, they must follow the party-line of the publisher...and the perceived demographics of the readership. Hence the otherwise inexplicable, yet safe and politically correct raves over poorly crafted and odious films. Publishers would much rather print a positive review on a rotten film than risk the wrath--and the subsequent carefully orchestrated letter campaign by the latest officially sanctioned aggrieved group.
For those who have read thus far, all is not lost. Just as you might subscribe to Absolute Sound, Stereophile or better yet, Positive Feedback if you want to avoid the lame low-end coverage in your dailies, so too can you subscribe to a film journal of your choice and satisfy your need to read something more substantial concerning the art of film.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Kimber Kable

Topic - Chill: Ebert's a reviewer, not a critic...what do you expect? - JR Kelly 05:54:12 07/15/00 (4)

Ebert is billed as "film critic for the Chicago Sun Times" on TV (nt) - Scott 11:51:20 07/17/00 (0)

One Question. - AudioHead 12:42:48 07/16/00 (2)

consult the christian science monitor - dave 11:54:48 07/17/00 (1)

Thanks! <Nt> - AudioHead 07:10:38 07/18/00 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.