One thumb down for Ebert

Imagine you just finished production on a movie. With your job done, you wait for the release of the film so you can finally bask in your accomplishment.
But there is one last obstacle you have forgotten: the film critic.

Sitting comfortably in his theater chair, the critic spends a few hours picking apart what you spent months putting together. I actually feel a twinge of sympathy for even the worst films that get destroyed by critics. There must have been at least a few who did their job well, only to see a significant part of their lives receive a “D-.”
Justin Babin of “Disaster Movie,” I’m talking about you.

Among the movie critics, there is one who rules over them all with an iron thumb: Roger Ebert.

If “movie critic” was a category on Family Feud, this man would be an instant win answer. In my hometown newspaper, he is the only word on the subject. I’m never a fan of receiving information from a solitary source, but the position could be in worse hands.

Last week, Ebert reviewed “Tru Loved,” a film so indie I could only find five other reviews online. In 700 words, Ebert tore the film apart in every area.

I’m not defending “Tru Loved.” I have viewed the trailer, and the criticism seems just. What has me stirring in my standard dorm chair is that at the end of the article, he drops the bomb that he walked out early.

Ebert’s aware of the problem and claims “the rating only applies to the first eight minutes”, but this raises ethical questions about reviewers. While Ebert hasn’t walked out of a film since 1980 with “Caligula,” what about other film critics? How often do they slip out the back to catch the early train home and give a false review?
Most film reviews fear spoiling the plot of the film and avoid specific details, choosing instead to talk about broader concepts. The potential for dishonesty is there.

Criticism of any form of art should never be taken that seriously. All it takes is a good reputation or a silver tongue and a critic can bestow on anything the vague term “good art.”

Where Ebert fails his readers is by giving a bad impression about the entire film. What if that movie miraculously became better after the first act?
We will never know, thanks to Roger.

While the review explains Ebert’s action, the “one star” rating will be scanned by many readers without going further.

Reviews are best utilized by not paying attention to the final score, just the specific details on why the piece was given that evaluation. A Michael Bay film may be panned for excessive explosions, but there are some people who would rather see two hours of pyrotechnics than “There Will Be Blood.”

While I respect the man’s knowledge and found the review an interesting commentary, I’m not going to rule out that he could be wrong. After all, he did give a favorable review for “You Don’t Mess With the Zohan.”