4 ms·

I never liked how this monologue mischaractarizes the value of critics. The actual criticism itself may not be terribly valuable unto itself (though I argue th

I never liked how this monologue mischaractarizes the value of critics. The actual criticism itself may not be terribly valuable unto itself (though I argue that a great critic's ability to compare what's new to what's already come is very valuable), but when you combine the criticism with an audience, it becomes very valuable indeed. Ebert didn't just create a body of work, he also created a massive audience for that work that can't be ignored in assessing the value of a critic.

replicatorblog 16y ago
I think your point has some merit, but what has Ebert really done? Has his criticism shaped film making in any tangible way? Has any critic in any field, maybe since John Ruskin? I know Ebert has had a rebirth in the tech community with his speech synthesizer and Twitter account, but really the guy opined on a syndicated basic cable and newspaper column for 25 years. His only significant innovation is the "Thumbs Up/Down" rating. Certainly famous, but influential or valuable? At least as it relates to a comparison with film makers of the day? As a thought experiment, think of all the movies you can for the last 25 years, good, bad, weird. Probably a fairly large list. Now think of all the insights, or "Thumbs" ratings you can remember from Ebert? Or any other critic? How do they match up?
- derefr 16y ago
  The work of a modern critic is not in their individual opinions on individual works: rather, a single "Thumbs Up" is more like a single dance step in a ballet, an atomic element that works with others to create the actual art. What you get from a man like Ebert is a partial ordering of an infinite set; a way to overcome choice paralysis, by culling all but a finite number of the choices. Criticism is how we deal with the Information age, and critics are valuable because they willingly go out and spend their days drinking from the firehose, so we can get a rather more purified liquid from the other end.
- brandnewlow 16y ago
  You need to read some of Ebert's Great Movies reviews. The man is one of our great living humanists.

replicatorblog 16y ago

I think your point has some merit, but what has Ebert really done? Has his criticism shaped film making in any tangible way? Has any critic in any field, maybe since John Ruskin? I know Ebert has had a rebirth in the tech community with his speech synthesizer and Twitter account, but really the guy opined on a syndicated basic cable and newspaper column for 25 years. His only significant innovation is the "Thumbs Up/Down" rating. Certainly famous, but influential or valuable? At least as it relates to a comparison with film makers of the day? As a thought experiment, think of all the movies you can for the last 25 years, good, bad, weird. Probably a fairly large list. Now think of all the insights, or "Thumbs" ratings you can remember from Ebert? Or any other critic? How do they match up?

derefr 16y ago
The work of a modern critic is not in their individual opinions on individual works: rather, a single "Thumbs Up" is more like a single dance step in a ballet, an atomic element that works with others to create the actual art. What you get from a man like Ebert is a partial ordering of an infinite set; a way to overcome choice paralysis, by culling all but a finite number of the choices. Criticism is how we deal with the Information age, and critics are valuable because they willingly go out and spend their days drinking from the firehose, so we can get a rather more purified liquid from the other end.
brandnewlow 16y ago
You need to read some of Ebert's Great Movies reviews. The man is one of our great living humanists.