> I think what set Ebert apart is that he consistently judged films in the context of their ambitions. A great example of this was his review of The Human Cent

> I think what set Ebert apart is that he consistently judged films in the context of their ambitions. A great example of this was his review of The Human Centipede. He said that the film perfectly accomplished its ambitions, but those ambitions were so dark, so far outside the norm that his rating system was simply incapable of properly rating the film. In his own words[1]: > I am required to award stars to movies I review. This time, I refuse to do it. The star rating system is unsuited to this film. Is the movie good? Is it bad? Does it matter? It is what it is and occupies a world where the stars don't shine. [1]http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100505/REVIEWS/100509982 http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20...