This is a golden age for film criticism. Never before have more critics written more or better words for more readers about more films. But already you are ahead of me, and know this is because of the internet.
Twenty years ago a good-sized city might have contained a dozen people making a living from writing about films, and for half of them the salary might have been adequate to raise a family. Today that city might contain hundreds, although (the Catch-22) not more than one or two are making a living.
Film criticism is still a profession, but it's no longer an occupation. You can't make any money at it. This provides an opportunity for those who care about movies and enjoy expressing themselves. Anyone with access to a computer need only to use free blogware and set up in business.
Countless others write long and often expert posts on such sites as IMDb, Amazon, Rotten Tomatoes and in the comment threads of blogs such as this one.
Sean P. Means, my friend at the Salt Lake Tribune, has been compiling a dreary list of movie critics who have lost their jobs. Does anyone compile a list of first-rank critics now active on the internet? I suspect there are 20 or 30 for every name on Sean's list; some of them in fact, are on Sean's list. I'm discovering new ones every week. The world wide web is an enormous bushel, and you can hide a lot of lights under it.
Long ago, when this transition was first taking shape, I came across a young man named James Berardinelli, who had started reviewing films online from somewhere in New Jersey. We corresponded, and I found he was in his 20s, had a job as an engineer, a passion for film, and long evenings to fill because of a loss in his life. He said he traveled to New York or Philadelphia to see screenings or attend theaters. He was extraordinarily self-disciplined, and wrote more reviews than most "full time" critics. He began to attract attention.
Today, by some measures, Berardinelli is among the half dozen most-read critics in the world. He still works as an engineer. His site doesn't support him. The studios and other industry advertisers don't give a damn about film criticism, preferring to direct most of their online ad budgets to celebrity and gossip sites. Well, Jim has never made a living from his site, so he's used to that. He told me once his Amazon resale commissions helped to offset his out-of-pocket costs.I knew from finding links on IMDb, MRQE, Metacritic, RT, MRI and other conglomerators that there many were good critics in the world. They were only the tip of the iceberg. When I started this blog two years ago, I decided to personally approve the comments because I didn't want my site to enable the subliterate goon squads infesting so many comment threads. I've received more than 600,000 comments so far, and not even 400 of them have been worthless. Goons don't bother, but intelligent posts abhor a vacuum.
I savored some of the comments. I looked forward to the next posts of their authors. I began to realize they were from all over. Not just America, but dozens of nations. They linked to their blogs, and I discovered a world of film criticism that thrived below the radar. These writers are never linked by the conglomerators, but one of their reviews might be better than anything linked on IMDb--and I include my own work. The conglomerators have little curiosity and limited quality control. I've gone to linked "reviews" on IMDb that consisted of a one-paragraph synopsis written from a trailer.
The sites link mostly to North American sources, with a few reviews from the UK, Australia, Ireland and so on. IMDb to its credit has a few links to France, Italy, Germany, Scandinavia, but in the local languages. Well of course they're in the local languages. But English is a de facto international language, and the writers I found through my blog not only write in English, but in elegant English.
Last fall I finally surrendered and joined Twitter. Ah, that's a story in itself. Sifting and following and unfollowing, I compiled an assortment of other Tweeters who met only one criteria: I considered them worth my time. If I clicked on their avatars, often they linked to blogs. Now I was truly astonished. I found them writing on all possible topics, and they were often more evocative and gripping than the usual mainstream sources. Most of these bloggers wrote for the joy of writing, because they wanted to and had something to say. What more do you want?
Eventually I recruited some of my foreign critics to contribute guest reviews to my site. They became the Far-Flung Correspondents. A week ago at Ebertfest, every single one of them attended (one was delayed by the volcano, but not defeated). They became the defining element of the 12th annual festival, appearing on panels, joining in Q&As, mixing at parties, simply sitting in the audience and chatting with those around them. They were from Egypt, Turkey, the Philippines, Mexico, South Korea. There were Americans of Pakistani and British origins. A Chinese-Canadian. I knew how well they wrote. That's how I found them.
Here's an interesting footnote. They paid for their own transportation. In other words, they had income that didn't depend on movie criticism. I had two lawyers, a city administrator, an I.T. expert, two students, an international marketing consultant, a university teacher. I enjoy Ebertfest beyond all measure, but they made this year's very special. Their transforming presence was possible because of the internet and discoveries I made through my blog.
I am obviously approaching the end of my own career. April 1 was my 42nd anniversary at the Chicago Sun-Times. I wouldn't bet on either one of us making it to 50. But the internet has transformed me and is transforming the Sun-Times. In the vast sea of the internet, readers need brands to help them navigate. The Chicago Sun-Times is a successful brand. I prefer the word "title," or, hey, even "newspaper," but "brand" has replaced "name," just as "market" has replaced "city." When TV people tell me "I came here from the Atlanta market," I keep my thoughts to myself.
Yes, I'm sad that traditional newspapers have come upon hard times, and traditional print venues for film criticism are disappearing. I thank God I got into journalism at 16, that I edited pages over turtles in the print shops of hot lead operations, that I felt the rumble of the building when the presses started to roar, that I worked beside reporters who had a hat on their head, a cigar in their teeth, a bottle in their drawer, and shouted "BOY!" when they needed a copy kid. All that belongs to the past in the same way as horse-mounted cavalry and India clipper ships.
But I'm feeling good these days. I love movies, and I love writing about them and reading about them. I feel like part of a truly World Wide Web (and what a magical term that is--worthy of science fiction). I know good movies are valued everywhere, and good writing. Michael Caine loves to say "Not many people know that." I know secrets not everybody knows, one of which is that a large part of the future of literary English centers on the Indian subcontinent.
Another thing not everybody knows is that some of the best critical writing on the web can found in seemingly specialist sites, devoted to science fiction, film noir, animation, horror, silent films, anime and so on. And video games, whether or not they're Art :). I haven't even mentioned drama, classical music, architecture, dance, photography, painting and on and on. Great critics have been and are being developed. They mostly aren't making money, but now they have limitless outlets, and not long ago there were a handful.Recently a friend of mine sent an e-mail to several movie critics. He was Jeff Shannon of Seattle, a good critic who has been in a wheelchair since an accident in youth.
"Guys," he said, "I've been asked to provide career advice to a young disabled college student who wants to pursue a career as a film critic. I'm not one to sugar-coat reality, so my immediate advice for him would be to enjoy film criticism/appreciation through blogging and possibly attempting to write books about films, etc. In all sincerity I can't advise the kid to pursue this career under present circumstances. From my perspective as someone who had various highs and lows in the job since 1984, I'd feel like I was doing the kid a disservice if I told him he could make a decent living at it. I just don't see that happening for anyone apart from the upper-echelon critics who've been established for years or decades (and recent cutbacks at Variety prove that even the "A-list" critics are under siege).
"So, in all sincerity and honesty, do you think I should encourage the kid to follow his passion (which is what I would normally do), or give him a hard dose of reality? Maybe he could consider other work in the film-biz that holds more potential?"The best response to this question came from my hero David Bordwell, who is the most knowledgeable film critic in America. I won't even get an argument about that. David and his wife Kristin Thompson, herself on the topmost shelf, have published many invaluable books, including textbooks few film students fail to use. These textbooks are extraordinary above all because they are books, written in classical English prose and a great pleasure to read. Now David and Kristin have transformed their own careers with the best single movie blog on the web. After distinguished careers as much-published writers, it's as if the internet allowed them to unleash their real energy.
Here's what David wrote back: "Last year I moderated an Ebertfest panel consisting of a dozen or so critics. A student from the audience said he wanted to be a critic too. Instead of advising him to get into a more financially rewarding form of endeavor, like selling consumer electronics off the back of a truck, the panelists encouraged him. This form of altruism, in which you help people to become your competitor, is alarmingly common in the arts."A moderator doesn't get to talk much, so I couldn't respond. What I wanted to say was: Forget about becoming a film critic. Become an intellectual, a person to whom ideas matter. Read in history, science, politics, and the arts generally. Develop your own ideas, and see what sparks they strike in relation to films."
Yes! This is the best possible advice. I tell young students: Take film courses, certainly. But cover the liberal arts. Take English literature, drama, art, music, and the areas Bordwell lists. Learn something about science and math. A physical anthropology course was my introduction to the theory of evolution, which is an opening to all of modern science. Don't train for a career--train for a life. The career will take care of itself, and give you more satisfaction than a surrender to corporate or professional bureaucracy. If you make careers in that world, you will be more successful because your education was not narrow.
What the internet is creating is a class of literate, gifted amateur writers, in an old tradition. Like Trollope, who was a British Post official all his working life, they write for love and because they must. Like Rohinton Mistry, a banking executive, or Wallace Stevens, an insurance executive, or Edmund Wilson, who spent his most productive years sitting in his big stone house in upstate New York and writing about what he damned well pleased. Samuel Pepys, who wrote the greatest diary in the language, was a high officials in the British Admiralty. Many people can write well and yearn to, but they are not content, like Pepys, for their work to go unread. A blog on the internet gives them a place to publish. Maybe they don't get a lot of visits, but it's out there. As a young women in San Francisco, Pauline Kael wrote the notes for screenings of great films, and did a little free-lancing. If she'd had a blog, no telling what she might have written during those years.At this year's Ebertfest, Chaz and I hosted a "meet and greet" for the Correspondents and Ebert Club members. One man in his early 20s looked somehow familiar. I discovered this was Homer, who I met as a kid on an Ebert & Roeper Film Festival at Sea a decade ago. He said he'd just graduated college. We asked him what he had studied.
"English literature," he said, "because that's what you told me to take, instead of locking into a career path."
What are you doing now?
"I'm in law school."
Then Homer said words of the greatest significance: "I'm trying to figure out what I can do with that."
That's what an education is for. That's what life is for. That's the discovery made by these extraordinary writers I've found on the World Wide Web. Find out all you can, and see what you can do with it.
The photographs are of internet writers I admire. I mention no names because I would have felt bad forgetting someone. Many of the photos look strange because they're avatars. That's the spirit.
I found the comic book cover used at the top at OmniBrain.
Where it all began: My entry the Blogs of my Blog.
Indeed, I'm still discovering great bloggers to read on the web. I'm sure the same goes for you.
Flannery O'Connor once said, "I write to discover what I know."
But, as you mentioned, a lot of these writers, myself included, write for the sheer joy of it. We write to share what we know.
As for Ebertfest, such a good idea to post videos from the festival online. They, combined with the words of bloggers I admire, helped to bring the experience to life for me, in a way that was no less vivid had I been there myself.
Hopefully, I won't have to read their words or watch the videos next year for the experience. :-)
Dear Roger,
Reading your words brings me joy and contentedness, because those are the strongest feelings that I believe you to imbue your words with: joy, at these magical things in life, movies and otherwise, and contentedness, that joy is enough. You write about life and life alone, and you do it beautifully, with a serene passion that I try to aspire to.
My recent discovery of your blog, and the recent tornado following Arizona's brings to my mind Tommy Lee Jones' "The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada," probably my favorite film of the past twenty years. I found a DVD copy in a bargain bin a couple of years ago and, remembering hearing that it was good, I watched it. And then I watched it again. And again.
There is a scene, midway through, where Jones and Melquiades stop at a strip mall. Jones gets out of the truck to get something at a store, and while he's out, Melquiades sees, indirectly in the passenger rear view mirror, an electronics store, its big window filled with huge flat-screen TVs. He gets out of the truck and walks to the store window, eyes filled with wonder at the giant objects of desire, the current embodiment of the American dream. On every screen of the many TVs, a NASCAR race is being shown. The all-American sport. After a few seconds, the checkered flag is waved: the end of the race, the end of the long, hard road, the dream fulfilled. But Melquiades cannot touch these, cannot have them: that glass wall stands between him and them, his dim reflection in the glass.
This scene has stayed with me; I find it to be a distillation of what film should be: graceful, profound, succinct, masterful visual storytelling. I used it to teach my thirteen-year-old son how to read a movie: he readily understood. I just hope that he can watch other movies with the same eyes.
It was watching you and Gene, first in "Sneak Previews," and then "At The Movies," that first showed me what film really was and how it can be important and deeply meaningful. For this I cannot thank you enough, and I hope my son takes some of what you gave to me into his own life.
I'm not exactly sure why I'm writing this; it just seemed like the right thing to do.
Thank you for your wonderful work, your ideas, your words.
Thank you for this entry. Thank you for your appreciation of quality, and for encouraging expression without necessarily trying to attach money to it. Thank you for verifying that there are literate writers posting on the Web - I had begun to wonder. Thank you for sharing your positive outlook when so much these days looks dark (or, at least what most media shows us). Wishing you much light ...
What an uplifting and encouraging post. Ok, I know, it may not feel that uplifting and encouraging that paying critic jobs are dwindling. But I like your perspective on how the Internet is enabling amateur writers of many stripes. I like to think I'm similarly enabled, and now that you've framed it this way I like feeling like I'm one of many out there enjoying writing, enjoying finding a (small) audience, and enjoying searching out others doing the same thing.
I just want to say thank you for introducing me to Reelviews, and thank you so much for your blog in general.
After a hard day of dealing with people in my day job that lack insight, perspective or any concept of a bigger picture; this blog and those like it on the web give me a reason to keep striving for excellence and keep my creative dreams alive.
It's easy to forget amidst the chaos of everyday life, but this truly is the golden age of everything, including film criticism.
I understand that you leave me off this list to motivate me to be so much better than I am which is so good but maybe after you read my new review for Iron Man 2-D: Full Throttle you will add me to this list?
http://goo.gl/fb/i8Vxl
Ebert: You are not lacking in energy and vivid imagery.
I do appreciate your links to foreign correspondents, Roger. Thanks for doing that. I like it for two reasons. First some of them really are enjoyable to read, but just as much I like them for seeing points of view that come from different backgrounds where what's unimportant to me is important to them and vice versa.
As for careers in movie criticism, my degree is in creative writing. And yet my "career" is in computer programming which I don't really even like and didn't study in school beyond a few classes that I dropped. But my background in writing has really helped me a LOT regardless of what I do. In fact, it's probably the writing that got me my programming job. Long ago I worked in the employee relations department of Ford Credit's central office, and my boss took me aside and said, "I'm glad you got your degree in English. That's what mine is, too. If I want a lawyer or an engineer, I can exchange them at will because those are just technical. What's more useful is people who can express what they mean."
I left Ford 14 years ago and found a new company where I've stayed since then, but those words have rung true over and over again. I've known so many brilliant mathematicians and programmers, but their weakness in writing ability has gotten in the way of customer relations, staff relations and getting designs and projects right.
I dream of the day I can retire being a programmer and become a writer. For now I can't afford it at all--especially with this economy. I'm lucky for what I have. And I'm lucky I was an English major. But like you and other critics said, English isn't a career in most cases. It's a tool for other careers.
I have just recently joined the ranks of bloggers and those who tweet. I have been lucky enough to be exposed to the work of many of the writers that Roger aludes to.
I am just like the others, I have a full time job in the Investment industry. Love of film has been the one constant in my life. It is the default language that my brother and I speak. It is one of the things that truly energizes me in life. Finding others like myself online gives me an even deeper connection to the world.
I am a father of three and my family energizes me (and tires me) more than anything in my life. The blog I started combines my love of film and my love of being a dad. Right now I am posting an essay once a week, discussing some elements of a film that I have shared with my children.
Some of my best memories in my life were at the movies. I'm excited to the share them with my children. And to share them with all of you online.
See you out there.
@dumbricht on twitter
dumbricht.wordpress.com
Thanks for the thoughtfulness of this post. As with many of your recent posts, this one leaves me feeling somber yet hopeful -- nostalgic for a world I never knew but inspired to shape the future.
Just last night I stumbled across the old Alexander Graham Bell proverb: When one door closes, another opens.
But I had forgotten the second part: We often look so long and so regretfully upon the closed door that we do not see the one which has opened for us.
Thus it has been with traditional media, critics included. So focused on what is slipping away, they miss opportunities to carve out new footholds.
But I suppose all of this is old hat to you: a critic who literally loses his voice only to find a new medium to connect with people in an even more intimate and thoughtful way. :)
Yep, somber yet hopeful. Have a good day, sir.
Hi Roger. I am a professor of English literature (among other things), and it does me a great deal of good to hear you giving students this kind of advice to students. I'll be proud to share this blog post with my pupils (who already know how much I adore your blog).
By the way, it reminds me very much of this recent debate in the Times about the role of the literary critic in the 21st century: http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/can-neuro-lit-crit-save-the-humanities/. I would love to hear your thoughts.
Clark Moreland
Midland, TX
Ebert: Maybe it's just the blogs I read, but as a onetime English 101 teacher, I notice they usually deserve an A for their prose.
Another superb post, Roger. I always tell my friends who want to get into writing that they should just start a blog and see how it goes, reminding them that "blogging is its own reward." You can't go into it expecting to make money, become famous, or even get laid. But many of them have given it a shot and kept it up for years now, producing some really interesting and unique stuff.
The thing is, we are just scratching the surface with the power of the internet. It feels like we have already arrived, but how many blogs and independent websites were there ten years ago? Any? The word "blog" didn't even exist until 1999. Who knows where this all will go? Despite all the nonsense you can find on the web (just read the comments section of any newspaper's website), I remain hopeful that the internet provides a future where truth and intelligent thought can thrive.
This blog is just one place where we see it already occurring. When people aren't writing to sell something, it really changes the purpose. What will the internet be in 50 years? It can keep getting better and more powerful. Here's to looking forward to it.
How does the universe work? Truly. I was just wondering and thinking about this subject all week (largely because of your blog and those who you've brought to my attention via here and Twitter). And here you go with this post...
At the moment, I'm 23 years old and working a $10 an hour part-time job to support myself. I graduated a year ago with a BA in film and a minor in business. As someone who has always been successful academically, I often get questioned by people who have known me for some time as to why I decided on studying a subject like film. After all, there are so few jobs in the field (especially in Kansas, where I'm currently located), and as you've mentioned, criticism as a profession is becoming a thing of the past. Because I probably could have been successful in other fields (particularly law), I think they sometimes feel like I wasted my time and money.
But frankly, I enjoy learning because it increases my enjoyment and understanding of areas in which I'm already interested. I do plan on starting a blog or website in the near future, and my studies will only contribute to my confidence in my own writing. Sure, it won't be fattening my wallet, but since when has education been solely about livelihood?
Thank you for posting this blog entry. Having to read people constantly bemoaning the death of criticism can be disheartening, and it is easy to forget that ability to share your thoughts and passions is more significant than how much you're getting paid to do so.
What an outstanding post. Wow. If anything it reinforces that the old top-town model of news has evolved into something that takes into account for the deep interest that people have in one particular topic. You can now get reviews from people who actually like the genre they are reviewing. And, as you noted, that's not just limited to film. It includes all kinds of media, including books, comics, video games, and even websites.
Keep up the great work.
Buddy Scalera
http://wordspicturesweb.com/?p=953
Back in 2004, I started a blog. Some art criticism, some commentary, some pop culture, a little humor. I focused on illustration and newspaper-style comics, especially those published digitally.
I was lucky. The webcomics phenomenon was just coming into full fruition, and at the time there weren't many blogging about it. For all too brief a time, my blog was one of the clearing houses of ideas on comics as a medium, their history, and their future. Creators, aficionados, critics and fans indulged in the joys of the discourse.
Eventually, I burned out and the conversation passed me by. However, in its heyday, the blog got fifty thousand daily readers, with occasional spike-ups to six figures. At the same time, through it all, there was this overpowering headiness. I got to write about Derrida and Segar, Harold Bloom and Al Capp and the difference between a webcomic reaching 150,000 people and a comic strip that made it to the cover of Life magazine in the fifties. Most of all, I got to indulge in criticism. For some of my readers, it was one of the first exposures they had to the critical essay.
And that was one of the most incredible things -- had I gone the academic route after college, almost certainly I would have published a few papers that would be read by a few hundred. Maybe I would have found a decent lecturing job and maybe I wouldn't (it's not been a great market for English professors). By going into the workforce and ultimately indulging myself as a writer, I arguably had far more impact than I ever would have following traditional means.
Though that blog is nearly dead now, it gave me a huge number of friendships, more than one opportunity to lecture at symposiums, several successors, and a wife. My proposal to said wife, simulcast at a convention and online, involving many artists, was seen by well over a million people. If I didn't get rich financially from my blog, I can't begin to quantify how rich in spirit it made me.
Living in the future is a wonderful thing.
At least this isn't about video games. But seriously, I agree this is the golden age of film criticism and blogging in general.
I think that one of the greatest gifts I received growing up was a love for literature. I not only fell in love with the stories being told, but the language used, and the thoughts it brought to bear. I learned a lot about life from the books I've read and the movies I've watched, far more than I ever would have learned from just plowing through on a predetermined plan focused on getting such-and-such job, or having such-and-such career.
When I was a lot younger I used to write all the time. Scribbles in notebooks and journals, trying to put my own thoughts down in a style comparable to the writers I loved best. It was a compulsion for me, and there were many nights where I'd find myself unable to sleep until I had put pen to paper to get the thoughts out before they slipped away. Life eventually caught up, and career and family consumed the time the time and energy I used to devote to story absorption. I still wrote, but it was a technical exercise more for the job than any sense of self fulfillment. It was empty writing, soulless.
I realized that what I was doing was not what I loved.
Then I found this blog, and re-discovered my desire to say what I want how I want. A job may feed the pocketbook, but literature feeds the soul, and a life without the latter is just plain drudgery. I've begun to write again, and while my initial stabs have been amateurish and somewhat frustrating, I'm beginning to rediscover the voice I had before. For that, Mr. Ebert, I owe you a huge debt of gratitude. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much.
Roger, I loved what you wrote about bloggers and us "wannabe" critics that share one passion: watching movies. I agree that there's a new dawn for intellectual discussion and that the internet has opened many doors for debate among a community that doesn't distinguish age, sex or race. As someone who adores blogging and recommending movies to friends and family, I want to thank you for acknowledging us and our work.
I studied architecture and pretty much love the arts, in general. I completely agree that an education is for life and that it shouldn't be seen as merely a means to secure employment but a way of life, a way to grow and mature. If the current situation for professional critics is sad, I think its sadder the situation for professional viewers, those who value good cinema :). The movie industry makes preference for dumb, loud entertainments (like the disappointing "Iron Man 2") rather than the independents that actually care about characters and plot.
Anyway...again, thanks a lot for the article.
Dear Mr Ebert,
Thank you for writing this – and thank you for featuring me in it. If I were a better writer, I would be able to express how much it meant to me to see my picture included here. I hope you’ll excuse my copying this article and saving it: for me, these are words to live by.
I’m humbled to be mentioned alongside the Far Flung Correspondents (and the likes of Dr. David Bordwell) by anyone. For you to feature my picture in an article that discusses them is stunning. Thank you again.
Despite my film criticism having earned me the editorship of a national magazine and the associate editorship of a fairly prominent British culture blog, it has yet to earn me any money. I don’t mind. I do it for many reasons – chiefly because I love it as much as I have ever loved anything – and making money is not near the top of the list. Though I would love to earn a living from film criticism (who wouldn’t?), that desire does not motivate me. Subsequently, I was thrilled to read your praise of amateurs. I dislike intensely that, in modern speech, ‘amateur’ is synonymous with ‘sub-par’; whenever people ask me why I’m not earning money from film criticism, I force myself to remember Dr. Watson describing Sherlock Holmes, glowingly, as an ‘amateur’.
Perhaps because I am from England – or a particular part of England – I have an innate respect for amateurism. Growing up, many of my heroes were rugby union players – and rugby union, I’ve found it hard to explain to those who don’t follow it, was fully amateur until the mid-1990s. My childhood heroes were the greatest athletes in the world at weekends, and policemen, solicitors, coal miners and bank managers in the week. Subsequently, I don’t associate not being paid with not being worthy. I may never have been rewarded with money for writing about films, but I’ve never found anything else as rewarding.
Furthermore, I don’t think I’ve ever read an article that spoke more specifically to my experience, or that motivated me to become better at film criticism and, even more importantly, to lead the fullest possible inner life. So I hope I can be excused a third ‘Thank you’.
Scott Jordan Harris
P.S. This post contains the single most brilliantly deployed smiley in the history of the internet.
Mr Ebert, it's a rare thing to find a respected print film critic praise his underpaid or usually unpaid online colleagues as much as you did here. So thanks for that.
About 1 1/2 yrs ago there was a rather controverse discussion in Germany on a supposed minor value of online criticism compared to 'classic' writing, started by - you guessed it - a respected print critic. It couldn't get more ridiculous than that. Quality is not a question of the media chosen.
I think it is quite obvious by now that writing on film as such will only be able to survive by proving its importance on the web - just as any writing on cultural issues will. Those of us doing it with passion as well as visible talent keep film criticism alive long after the print industry has fired all their writers.
Thus it is good to know our work is appreciated by people like you knowing the business better than anyone else.
I have been maintaining a "blog" of sorts since 1998 - though the word "blog" (which I hate) didn't exist then. I called mine a "journal".
I don't remember what my reasoning was to make it public. I suspect it had something to do with taking control of my presence. It proved to be a good thing, if only so that my mother could read about what her son was up to all the way in Cali-forn-Ya.
At first, the writings were short chronicles of what I'd done through the day. Five hundred characters of the mundane.
But then, one day, something clipped inside and I just started writing about anything except what I was doing that day. I had bored myself.
Over time, that's changed, too. I used to try to keep everything personal. Now I spew whatever comes to mind to the keyboard if I think it's worth reading. Movie reviews are part of that, but also recipes for grilled cheese.
I think the trick is just to write. Readers will determine if there is worth in it to them. And in an age of rss feeds and follows, they can.
I feel like part of a truly World Wide Web
Roger, you are defining the world wide web. Everything you do there (the Journal, Twitter, etc) sets a new standard, raises the bar, and inspires the rest of us. You enrich the www greatly.
The Far-Flung Correspondents were amazing at EbertFest. This was my first full festival year, so I don't know what it was like without them. But, I enjoyed watching them and meeting many of them. They are all stars in their own right and amazing people.
I'm not a film critic. Just a factory worker who enjoys film on my own time and my own terms. I think that I am insightful about film, but feel no compulsion to express my recaps particularly. I enjoy reading those who do.
It was an interesting fish-out-of-water experience being a political conservative at a film festival. I wasn't exactly in the majority in that regard! I survived it, and thrived in it, by mostly tuning politics out for the week and immersing in film with some wonderful people. We may disagree on politics, but we can enjoy film together. As the amazing Omer Mozzafar has taught me since: friends first, as the starting point. I am so glad that I met him at EbertFest.
(Click on my name for my posts about EbertFest2010)
The highlights of EbertFest for me were:
- Meeting you twice! At the Meet n Greet, and at the FFC panel. You were very gracious with your time with me. I imagine that you were surprised that Dave Van Dyke and I were there together that morning!
- Watching the most beautiful movie I have ever seen - "Departures" - with my RE Journal debating partner Dave Van Dyke and his wife Dawn. Having lunch at Steak n Shake afterwards to pay off a Journal bet. I hated losing the bet, but loved paying it off. :)
- Meeting Michelle Monaghan by chance in the lobby 10 minutes before watching her film "Trucker". A powerful performance and a great little movie.
- Meeting Grace and Omar and Omer and Ali and the irrepressible Tom Dark in the hallways.
- Having three people look at my name tag at the Meet n Greet, which said only "Randy", and having them say "Oh, you must be Randy Masters". I met some friends from Roger Ebert's Journal there. Brett, Sean, Paul, and Kassie.
Many many more great moments. What a week.
I did have two friends tell me when I got home that I was weird for going to a film festival. Didn't need that. Oh well. Their loss.
I think this is gracious and democratic of you. Instead of whinging about how the real journalists are getting edged out by the blogosphere, you embrace the current changes.
For some reason though, I am sad that 20 people can't make their living and raise their family on film criticism.
I do worry a bit about the effects of the blogosphere, myself. I have been blogging & writing on the internet since 2001. And am an avid reader of internet writing. And I think it is *extremely* rare that writing on the internet is as beautiful or as polished as your writing. There are no Roger Eberts or Pauline Kael's right now. Indeed, the internet rarely appreciate or reward the well-crafted sentence or timeless prose or complex thinking. There's an enormous amount that is entirely breezy and ephemeral. It is fun, yes. But it's also very easily digestible for the most part.
You *can* make money on the internet as a writer but you have to write in a way that appeals to the most people and you have to write frequently in a way that doesn't give a lot of time for editing and reflection. And it usually has to be something that can be read in 15 minutes or less. With those constraints, it's tough.
Of all the timing in the world, this blog entry of yours couldn't have been timed better in its publishing.
Reading this brought tears to my eyes. This past week I'd been broken up emotionally by personal events, and last night was the breaking point.
I write because I must. My thoughts are constantly dynamic, stemmed from a deep fear of going stagnant and losing grip of potential ideas that are novel and groundbreaking. With the advent of blogging, I was able to release my heart and mind onto the web, and through trial and error I learned that beyond all things, thoughtful and articulate writing wins above all the schlop of trolls, goons, rants, and so on.
To even get one reader, one feedback – it's the ultimate joy. It means that someone put in the time and effort to (God forbid) read and digest paragraphs of thought over snippets of gossip/factoids. Even if viewership is low, if traffic barely averages 0.5 per day, to simply know that someone cared enough to read, that they found value in what I have to offer – it's more than any expensive gift or flowery, empty words will ever offer.
Thank you, Roger, for writing this entry. You've reinvigorated and helped reestablish why I continue to write, to think, to dream, and to hope.
Ebert: Now what we need is a link to your blog.
It's sort of tough to remain objective when reading this article since it so perfectly captures the last four or five years of my life: I was getting a B.A. in English, I started a blog to write about my pop culture interests, and it has over time developed into a "profession" (albeit in television, not film, criticism) that brings no profit but has become a huge part of my life.
I want to thank you for being so open to the idea of criticism as a meritocracy which operates independent of occupation, geographical location, age, gender, race, and all other variables. In particular, I am very pleased to see someone open to voices coming from both blogs and message boards. Good criticism is good criticism, no matter where it is located on the internet, although this there are sadly some who disagree; the internet breaks down and erodes boundaries in some ways, but there are critics who would turn up their nose at the idea that someone who does this for "fun" could be part of the same "profession," or that someone who blogs or posts is separate from those who "writes." Your openness to good criticism irregardless of these sorts of distinctions should be an example other critics should follow, and will certainly stand as an inspiration to young writers.
It was similar responses from TV critics which pushed me to keep writing criticism in my free time, which pushed me to engage with television within my English degree, which has now led me to a PhD program in Media and Cultural Studies I'm starting in the fall (coincidentally at University of Wisconsin - Madison, Bordwell/Thompson's former home). If I had accepted that criticism was a dying art, none of this would have been possible - I'm quite certain that, five years down the line, someone will think back to this article as an important step within their own journey on a similar road.
On behalf of them, and the "profession" of criticism, thank you.
Myles McNutt
Nova Scotia, Canada
I'm touched by the fact that none of the ones mentioned asked for this and you were the one who selected us out of your generosity and appreciation for the written word.
What impresses me most though is the fact that you formed a web of film lovers. We all know each other and appreciate each other becasue of you. It's like you introduced us to great writers from around the world and we became friends.
I remeber when I was in high school at the American International School in Egypt. We had to write a story about any incidents of our lives for homework. I handed my story in the next day and a week later the American teacher asked to see me after class.
She gave me an 'F' because she thought I got a professional writer to write it for me. "I find it hard to believe that an Egyptian can write that way in English."
I never thought an 'F' could ever make me feel good the way I did at that moment because I had indeed written it myself.
I later got an 'A'.
The fact that people are writing reviews because they want to, not because they have to is in itself a celebration for film criticism.
I hope to God, you weren't serious when you said, "I am obviously approaching the end of my own career." The day you a film comes out without a Roger Ebert review plastered all over it will be the day known as "the death of quality film-criticism".
Allow me to end my comment with something I wrote in my blog:
"My role as an Egyptian film critic on the web is one I’m very proud of. Let me explain. When it comes to mass communication, be it an article or a film review, the flow of information has always been from the West to the Middle East or Far East and so. My point is, it was always a one way flow.
The internet is the first type of mass communication that supports a two way flow in a borderless world. Still, if you think of the internet as this global media empire, you’ll find that it’s dominated by certain core nations (US,UK, etc.) and these core nations impose their culture on developing nations, so what Roger essentially did with this new foreign correspondents feature is more or less genius because now we’re no longer at the receiver’s end of the flow of information. This supports the concept of a balance of information flow.
I think Roger’s film website is the first of its kind and by that I mean it’s the first website to offer a global perspective on films. In other words Roger Ebert basically decentralized online film criticism. I can only encourage more and more foreign film fans to represent their views on films throughout the internet."
A lovely piece, Roger, and limned with hope and joy, but tempered for me by knowing too many talented writers and artists who have all but given up simply because the need to keep body and soul together now eclipses almost every other consideration, and because they clearly see the economic trend lines all pointing in the wrong direction.
It is a sobering thing to discover that you will never make a living doing what you love, not because of anything you did or did not do, but because of the year of your birth:
To Party after Party
We arrive too late
Always greeted by stragglers;
"It was great! It was great!"
-- driftglass
Meanwhile, Phillip K. Dick still remains the most fecund dead writer working today :-)
http://tinyurl.com/29vaewu
It seems like almost everyday, I'll read some reader comment on some online article, and the commenter will be just so ill-spirited and vicious that it actually makes me very sad. I hope people aren't actually that mean in real life.
But then, I'll happen upon a beautifully written and intelligent blog, and my faith in humanity will be restored again. I've discovered many of these amazing writers via your own blog and twitter, so thank you for that! Sure, there will always be crap on the internet, but that just makes finding the good stuff even more satisfying.
Though I've only been doing it for a few months, I actually find blogging to be very liberating. I think the act of writing, of discovering and analyzing, has changed how I think about things, for the better. Seriously, everyone should have a blog!
Oh, if only I could go back in time and be an English major...*sigh
First of all, I'd just like to say that it was amazing to finally come to Ebertfest with a festival pass. I graduated from UIllinois last May (Bachelor's in Creative Writing, minors in English and Cinema Studies) and had covered the event for two years for Buzz Magazine, but only got to see 3 or 4 movies each time. It was truly a pleasure to take three days off from my AmeriCorps term to come back to Champaign and watch ALMOST every film at the festival (I missed I Capture the Castle).
I would also like to second everyone who cites you as a great inspiration for their writing. Your success at transitioning from print publishing to blogging is a testament to your passion for film (although sometimes I think you "retweet" your friends a little too often).
And onto the heart of this comment. I was a top student (3.91 GPA and very involved in literary student groups), and I miss college immensely . . . I miss expanding my mind through coursework and scholarly discussion, and I would like to go back to school for a PhD in Cinema Studies. I see that a previous commenter (Myles) is pursuing that right now.
My main question for you is this: despite the downfall of film criticism as a paying occupation, do you happen to know about the job outlook for prospective Film professors now? Is it as bleak as the outlook for new English professors? Is there any way I can study and teach Film primarily, but also continue taking literature courses and teach English as well?
I had been meaning to speak to Mr. Bordwell about this at the festival -- and had actually emailed him about it in advance -- but I never got a chance to stop him for a chat.
Roger -- the one "amateur" critic your missing, and who can be good, is - well - me. I've included my URL. I'm just not that prolific. I also tweet frequently about films I love at http://twitter.com/alleverybody. I follow you, if that means anything...and I've been reading you for as long as I can remember, possibly since 1980. One of the first film books I stole from my college library - A KISS IS STILL A KISS...
Dr. Bordwell's advice above was awesome.
I tell my students (young and old) on the first day of class that I'm an old school teacher who believes in the old school idea of the liberal arts, that the university is the place you bring your ideas, beliefs, superstitions, prejudices and sympathies and place them on the table (i.e. the classroom) and engage with those ideas, beliefs, superstitions, prejudices and sympathies of their classmates. And, that is how learning happens. I tell the students on the first day that their job is to be transformed.
I'm still learning how to write about movies, though. Reading what many of the gifted dudes above write.
I, on the other hand, deserve an D for my previous post. My students will get a kick out of how horrendous my comment was.
By the way, Roger, I have especially enjoyed a blog you referenced in the comments area a few weeks ago: http://tearsinthenatureofthings.blogspot.com. That blog definitely deserves an A.
I think the part I enjoy about blogging myself, and one of its major benefits, is that you don't have to worry about whether there's an audience for what you're writing. There's no penalty for having no traffic, and a post that goes up is up forever, so there's always a chance somebody will rediscover something.
Though I do sometimes wish I had an editor. By the time a piece is done I kind of just want to get it up there, so I often find I've made some hilariously unprofessional blunder. (I do try to correct it when I actually get things wrong.)
Some of my favorites:
http://theecstatictruth.tumblr.com/
http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/markkermode/
Oh, and this one's not too shabby:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/
Your post sums up (in more thoughtful terms than I have been able to devise, of course) why I've been revising my "dreary list" of movie critics who have lost their jobs in the last four years.
When I started the list two years ago, print journalism and the economy overall were in the dumps. The list was my way of illustrating how short-sighted editors were cutting off their papers' unique voices and making their papers more anonymous and interchangeable with syndicated or wire-service criticism.
In January, I started to rewrite the list — largely because many of the people on it were thriving at their new jobs. Some found jobs at other publications, some in other professions, and some kept going on the Internet.
Now I include information on where people have found new work after their publications made the mistake of letting them get away. (If anyone reading this knows a writer on the list, I would love to update their status. Spread the word.)
I suspect, in many cases, the writers on my list will be working and thriving long after their former employers are gone.
Ebert: Latest to land on his feet: Todd McCarthy.
Ebert, the spirit of this post is so beautiful, so open. The ecosystem you describe is one that I want to live in. A universe of decentralised thought and information that will nourish many generations to come.
But I also feel swamped by it, a lot of the time. I feel like there's so much great writing out there (both amateur and professional) that maybe there's no point me adding my drop to the ocean. I am in my early twenties, and for years my ambition has been to write well: to be thoughtful, intellectual, expressive. And for as long as I can remember I've seen publication, or regular employment as a writer, as the golden ticket. If I could achieve that, I would know that what I was saying was worthwhile, was worth a reader's time. That I'd made it as a writer or a thinker.
Now I know that that's a foolish mindset to have, but I don't know what motivating force to establish in its place. If I work hard and strive ceaselessly to improve myself, I may produce worthwhile writing. But I will never be able to state that I am definitively worth reading ahead of the thousands of other critics and creatives whose writing is readily available on the internet. And I have no doubt that hundreds (at least) of those writers will always be better than I am, no matter how much I improve. Unfortunately, I have become convinced that anything I write has already been written, and written better, by someone whose blog or site is only a Google search away.
My point is not to decry the rise and rise of the "long tail" that the internet has allowed. Clearly it's an auspicious evolution. But it also makes me feel so fragile sometimes, so expendable. At least if I was a bricklayer, I'd know that those particular bricks in that particular wall couldn't get laid without me.
@Scott Jordan Harris
You should tell all of those people who think amateurs are beneath professionals that the word "amateur" originally means "to love" in Old French (so sayeth Wikipedia!). So amateurs are merely people who do something that they love, which will always be more inspired and more beautiful than work done by someone because they have to do it.
It also reminds me of a quote by the late great choral director Robert Shaw. He said, "Music, like sex, is too important to be left to the professionals."
I think, in the same way, that film criticism, as well as other aspects of writing, are also "too important to be left to the professionals." Some of the greatest art and the greatest criticism of art comes from amateurs.
@ozma
You're not reading the right people. I would suggest starting with the Far-Flung Correspondents, continue on to other people listed in "The blogs of my blog" and this post, and go from there. Of course, the Internet doesn't punish writers for wasting their readers' time as would print media, but polished writing on the Internet--even to the level of a Roger Ebert or a Pauline Kael--is less rare than you think.
@Wael
I also shudder to think about the end of Roger's film criticism days, but while the torch has not yet been passed, the fires are starting to be lit. This post, "The blogs of my blogs" post, and the Far-Flung Correspondents section on his website (of which you are one :-)) attest to this.
So while thinking about the eventual end of Roger's movie reviews saddens me, I do not fear for the future of film criticism. It is in very capable hands. :-)
Hi Roger,
Your prolific output and insightful writing is an inspiration to so many (even if I disagree, generally, with your view of the world). :)
I've been comenting some on the Beck post from a few weeks ago (and others over the last year or so), trying to persuade that a conservative view of justice and generosity and compassion is a better alternative (not sure how successful I was though), as well as debates on the Christian view of objective morality, etc.
Anyway, you are one of the many reasons I'm working to get a blog up and running. It will probably a bit amateurish, it will likely be read by almost no one, it will certainly be a late-night after the kids are in bed hobby, but it will be a real joy. I'm about 9 hours shy of an MBA, but intend to squeeze in a graduate level non-fiction creative writing course to hone my (limited) writing skills. I intend for the blog to be a reflection on religion, politics, sports, film, family, work, etc., all from a Christian perspective.
And you are one of the many inspirations for all this. You cultivate an open forum, with real interaction with your readers, all at a reasonably high level of debate (since most comments are written in a rush), and I have found that to be quite rare. I thank you for all of that.
"Find out all you can, and see what you can do with it."
This has been my approach to my education since, no, I never wanted to be "locked" into any career path, much to the dismay and chagrin of my family who consistently bombards me about what I want to BE after all kinds of education. What they don't get is that an education is not a means to an end, but an end in itself.
But I was introduced to the magical world of blogging by this darling http://itellstories.org/
over five years ago and there's been no turning back. I never cease to be amazed and surprised by what I've found and I'm so pleased that you've caught on. But I'm with Wael about: "I am obviously approaching the end of my own career." That's bollocks, I thought retirement was for people who don't like their jobs?
Also I like that you popped in Omar's picture - it's totally dreamy. And thanks for putting mine right under it, at this point I think the actual photographer deserves a lot of credit for it. A lovely lady named Melissa:
http://www.andyshowgirl.blogspot.com/
xxx
Damn straight about India being the literary country to contend with, Rodge.
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Young+spunk,+more+open,+more+books&artid=N1PN3f5dJck=&SectionID=41ptteGX1Qw=&MainSectionID=41ptteGX1Qw=&SectionName=42QPdTRt8sE=&SEO=
As an undergraduate student writing film criticism for my college newspaper without pay, driven only by the love of what transpires onscreen, it's incredibly encouraging of you to pay tribute to many unsung heroes, and in the meantime uphold their passion and dignity. Thank you, Roger, for these inspiring words.
No writers but dont forget the great Filmspotting out of Chicago public radio.
Ebert: Of course not. With Milos Stehlik and others.
Great read. It's good to see some optimism in the midst of the screeches of "film criticism is dead" that we've hearing from bloggers in the past couple of years.
Amateur bloggers don't do it for the money, and they don't care that they don't get paid for it. Many people just enjoy writing about film, and many of them are actually good at it.
I've devoted hours upon hours, days upon days of my time to watch movies, to study film history, to understand film theory. I did this knowing I'll never benefit financially from it. I did it just because I love film and anything that is intellectually stimulating.
So thank you, Roger. Thank you for encouraging those who write about what they love.
Dear Roger, THANK YOU!
I keep on coming across posts on the net about how "film criticism is dead! BLOGGERS SUCK! SUUUUCK!" and follow it up with a mission statement:
"I'll fight, 'til from my bones my flesh be hack'd.
Give me my armor."
While it's true that there are many stupid bloggers and it's hard to filter out the good from the massive tide of bad, allow me to submit that a majority of professional print critcs "SUUUUUCK!"
No, I'm not kidding. After my discovery of the IMDb external reviews sectiona couple of months back, I started the random click thing, and I'm off it now; now, it's just a fast way of getting to yours and Berardinelli's reviews. And the occasional Manohla Dargis or Stephanie Zacharek.
The deathsayers claim that there's an editorial filter the print critic goes through, but from where I'm reading (the savage and promising hinterlands of India), that filter is worse than me at judging writing, and that's saying something really bad.
Bloggers, on the other hand, feel no pressure to constantly write, most don't write about even half the movies they see, and so write a) brilliant, in-depth pieces when they do write and b) no bad pieces, bad pieces get well-edited with even, in some cases, weeks from first word written to publishing.
And Indian critics are even worse than the American lot! Most of them take an annoying, elitist stand about Indian cinema and regurgitate American critics (I remember there was a big hullabaloo when some joker rewrote your review of Finding Nemo) about the international variant. It's telling that the place I go to to see whether I want to watch an Indian movie in the theatre or at home is IMDb.
And there's one who, in a review of less than two hundred words, feels compelled to write about every aspect of the movie; plotting, cinematography, photography, direction, writing, characterisation and others all invariably figure in the review.
I hated the idea of criticism for seventeen and a half years of my life, and I blame the Indian media -- the print writing -- for that.
I've loved it for the other year, and I blame the internet for that.
By default, because I comment on every film in wide-release, I am Metacritic's unofficial official blogger. I used to watch only "art"(or vintage) films, now I watch everything. Writing about mainstream cinema can be fun if you do it with some irreverence. What's neat about writing on the web is that the blogger doesn't have to deal with plot synopsis. The people at Metacritic, I think, find me exasperating because their readership and bloggers are largely video game players and not cineastes. But it's easy for my micro-readership to find my comments.
Ebert: Don't be shy. Give us your URL.
In my previous comment I failed to highlight the most striking trait of the blogging community - the generosity. Roger has been a model that we should all aim to follow.
I hope to make him proud and to always be open and supportive of my fellow writers.
See you out there.
I believe what Michael Caine says habitually is "Not many people know that".
Wael's blog: http://cinephilefix.wordpress.com/2010/04/29/wael-versus-the-volcano-vol-2-the-uplifiting-sequel/#comment-477
Also worth notice is Wael's anecdote about meeting a foreigner-to-Egypt in a coffeeshop who disdained him when Wael said he was a movie critic. "Movie critic?" Feh. Why isn't he doing something to help save the world?
A chucklehead. Albeit, one other way to help save the world is to have patience with chuckleheads.
One of the world's big problems is xenophobia: suspicion or downright paranoia about people who "aren't like you."
It's so much easier to trigger mass suicides when one mass of people is convinced, by their own small-mindedness and the exhortations of leaders, that the other guys are so unlike you as to be evil -- and it's okay to even wipe out their children, as we must admit the U.S. government continues to do lately.
Oh, sorry. Did I say "mass suicides?" I meant "corrective actions to promote the general welfare."
But it's not so easy to "correct" people with termination of themselves and their children when it turns out you both like the same movies, is it? You're faced with the choice of either opening your eyes or getting even crazier.
I see grand ideals behind all this, just like the college freshman I once was. The question from the Roman Philosopher comes to mind: "Which part of this work is mine?"
The Far Flung Correspondents Roger chose, each of whom seemed like a favored first cousin to me when we met, do also have worthy parts in this universal work. It won't be found in the want ads, but can be more effective and more far-reaching than a for-pay job. (Nor is it improbable that what they're doing won't eventually yield practical results, individually.
(See, Randy? I ain't so intimidating after all. Sticking to your guns as you do in these blog arguments is also a worthy part of this free work.)
Roger, you specifically list fine arts and humanities subjects to read in without mentioning science and mathematics. I am obliged to point out that science and math are two of the pillars of a liberal arts education. I know that you yourself feel quite strongly about the intellectual black hole that is creationism, so I must ask: without any understanding of science, how can someone have any idea that creationism (or for that matter homeopathy, astrology, numerology, etc) is junk?
Science trains us to think rigorously about how we know what we think we know. Even if someone is not interested in becoming a scientist, the mode of thought it teaches is different from (yet complementary to) those that the humanities teach.
I might add that most scientists I know, if asked to craft a wide-ranging education, would include the humanities along with basic science without hesitation. It's always strange to me that humanities scholars don't give science the same standing.
Ebert: I absolutely agree, and I have rewritten.
Technologically, the internet has been a real blessing to me. I find that when I write about various subjects, I not only improve my own skills, but I also learn more about the subject matter. So even if one does not have a blog, the effort of writing is a fine self-imposed assignment. Lots of excellent free material also is available online, as well. The Purdue OWL is excellent, as is The Nuts and Bolts of College Writing. Then, of course, there is the built in features of MS Word. It's a great time to be alive, with respect to technology.
Also, the wealth of free science-related programs is stunning, if you know where to look. "What a wonderful world, oh yeah."
Sadly it's not only film critics, but all writers that are suffering in the age of the internet, working for less than peanuts, for the dust at the bottom of the peanut jar. And yet, what a wonderful time to be a writer; just a few clicks and your words are available across the globe.
Roger,
This is a beautiful post with a business model staring you in the face. Somebody needs to aggregate the work of these people you've met and put it together so that we can gain a better understanding from a greater number of people. How about giving each of them a thumb with which to rate films? We would all gain, from fans to movie-goers to the bloggers themselves and, most certainly, the craft itself.
I wrote long ago that people who write because they have something to say are different than those who are paid to write something. For every blog about, say, nose hair, there's one filled with beauty, elegance and grace.
Finally, you have been an important part of my life for many, many years, and I would love to see this become your legacy.
Terry Heaton
Senior VP Media 2.0
AR&D
Dallas, TX
Hi Tom,
Consider me no longer intimidated. Still awed. :)
You hit the nail on one point: it changes the conversation with people (arguments?) on politics when you've met face to face and have shared a separate passion (movies).
I'm still passionate about politics, in the minority here, and generally sticking to my guns. But now it's with friends and not just names on a link. That will probably soften my approach, which is not a bad thing.
I'm afraid I do not share your praise for things online.
Yes, Mr. Berardinelli and Dan Schneider are good, but they are exceptions that prove the rule. And I am glad you have featured folks like that.
Most of the bloggers on RT or not either write in the surfer boy fanboy way or they write Proustian tracts on camera movements to try to impress film school graduates.
And the specialty sites do go more in depth on B films and horror/sci fi, but only in terms of the basics. There is no deeper angle on the art itself.
I am sure you've heard of Ray Carney. His website offers depth that goes beyond Bazin-like narcolepsy. He also writes on things beyond film.
http://people.bu.edu/rcarney/
He is also the foremost expert on all things Cassavetes.
But, like Schneider and Berardinelli, Carney is the exception.
I am a film critic from Germany, have been at it since 1997, and never really got the foot down enough to create a living from it.
For years now, I've been toying with the thought of starting something else on the side, because this criticism job will not lead anywhere anymore.
Roger's blog post is actually a bit bone-chilling, but also eye-opening. Not that I hadn't known the situation before, but when Roger confirms my thoughts (and those of my colleagues) from another continent and from the top end of the professional spectrum, this really is more fact than opinion.
I feel a bit freed now, after reading the post and writing this, and will have to rethink my professional life. Good thing tomorrow's a monday, the ideal day for starting new things.
PS: To all those who googled me for some reason and find this: I will keep on reviewing movies for the time being, and running my company as well.
Ebert: "Great critics have been and are being developed. They mostly aren't making money..."
Your entry struck a chord with me. I was lucky enough to have a mentor in the art world who helped me get started as an art critic four years ago. Since then, I have written for local weekly, monthly, and bi-monthly magazines here in Santa F and will, hopefully soon, be published in ARTnews. Santa Fe is a great place for nurturing an interest in the arts and my experience as a writer has opened up a whole world to me: I co-chair a committee that supports the contemporary art programs at a local museum, I'm pursuing a degree in Art History (just completed a Bachelors in Anthropology, resisting the urge to concentrate in any one area such as biological anth and going instead for a general degree) and a friend recently asked me if I would be interested in giving a talk on writing to a group of high school students who are in an after school program. I feel very fortunate that what I do is respected and people have told me that they enjoy reading what I write. Even a museum director recently told me she liked my work. Several artists have posted pdfs of articles I wrote about them on their websites.
Now, the point of all this posturing is that I find I still cannot quit my proverbial day job. Although I find myself at the studios of major artists every week, the majority of my time is spent making the rounds through museum galleries making sure the art stays on the walls. I work full-time as a security guard, working for low pay as a government employee. It isn't something, necessarily, to rise above. I love my job. It's one of many hats I wear. But, with people who know me primarily as a writer, I register the faint shock on their faces when they see me in my uniform. I am grateful that most people think its cool. If I could quit and write full-time I'm not even sure I would.
In this post, you discuss how the internet has made millions of artists and writers free to express themselves without monetary or logistical confinements. The debate that your video game post inspired shows that the modern definition of art has been besieged by populist revision. In reading your work (and the comments that it incites), one can't escape the conclusion that the hierarchical nature of art has that has existed throughout the ages is being slowly dismantled. Without major corporations or institutions having control over distribution, classification, and evaluation of art, we the people will now have more control over the information we take in.
And thus, we won't have to listen to silly critics like you any more, telling us what to watch just because bigwigs at the Sun-Times gave you all the authority.
Oh, and play Portal.
Well... erm... it is philosophy that trains one to think rigorously about how one knows what he thinks he knows; whereas, it is science that requires one to think rigorously about obeying the rules of the going things to know at the risk of his employment status.
I gathered this from perusing the multitudinous comments on Roger's essays on evolution vs. creationism. Both sides -- who think there are only two sides -- consider philosophy pointless; so I found from experimental postings. So then, both are doomed to repeat their philosophies in louder and louder detail, confusing them with with "Truth," which is indeed no philosophy, but a contest of assumptions showing signs of rigor mortis with a capital "T".
Anyway, Roger, I think what you're doing is a great contribution to the way internet traffic behaves, and may you eventually spawn many imitators, so long as the electricity holds out.
(That's what worries me about the whole thing.)
"I know good movies are valued everywhere, and good writing."
This is the absolute truth, and it is the only thing that matters at the end of the day, in my opinion. Quality will cut through the bullshit, eventually, even if it takes a long time and if it skips the initial commercial success.
I despise labels, and recently the debate on film criticism has only reinforced my opinion that writings on films are situated on a spectrum of greys, not merely black and whites (no matter how elegant that may sound). There is simply no just "film criticism" and "not film criticism." There are musings, opinions, stories, essays, rants, thoughts...some more well-written than others, some more evocative than others. In the end, what is fine film criticism to one may be of less value to others, but what matters is that thoughts are being communicated and written words are celebrated. What matters is the volume of opinions that are being shared now - which allows showcase of a more diverse range of perspectives - which is a healthy growth, in my opinion. What matters is that people are still actively thinking and talking about films more than ever. Sure, with volume comes growth in both the good and the ugly, but that's what personal judgment is for, and I do believe that quality will shine through the mundane in the end, be it located in print or cyberspace.
Labels are unimportant. Choices are good. A sound judgment is invaluable.
Some of your fans might find that "nearing the end of my career" remark troubling. But not me, because it's so obvious what you're up to. You're just laying some groundwork now so that at the proper time you can take a step back, relax a bit, and review *fewer* movies. Thereby freeing up time and energy for your next act, which is:
Reviewing video games!
Now that you've challenged/dared/trolled the internet into generating and defending a list of a hundred or so games that are alleged to have artistic merit, you're going to go through that list and put it to the test, generating the definitive outsider's-perspective review to help the world know which actually *are* of artistic merit and which are most worth the time investment. Eventually leading to a huge paperback reference called _The Great Videogames_, and the inevitable followup title _Your Videogame Sucks_.
Right?
Hi Roger,
Thanks for writing this; it's helped reinforce in me the idea that what I'm doing — trying to become a film critic — is worth it, even (especially?) if it never leads to financial reward.
I completely agree about "training for life" and about how important an arts education can be no matter what you plan to do in life.
Thanks again,
Hugh
Comon guys!
Quite a lot of you appear to be very intelligent and I bet you have some great reviews (that a lot of us want/are going to check out).
PLEASE post the URL for your sites :)
As this entry implies, it isn't merely that we are entering a golden age of film criticism. I believe we are entering a golden age of expression and communication of all sorts. The Internet has opened the floodgates to anyone and everyone who feels they have something to offer, and while this means Sturgeon's Law ("90% of everything is crud") applies now more than ever, it also means innumerable gems that might once have never been noticed by the public at large have a fighting chance, regardless of what the Powers that Be think of it.
At its best, the World Wide Web is an anarchist's dream, in which information and ideas can flow freely regardless of wealth or power or fame, and in which no one rules and everyone can have their say. That's why countries like China are so terrified of it, and spend so much time and effort trying to censor it. It is the antithesis of totalitarianism.
If that can be maintained, the next few decades are going to be very interesting indeed.
The Spark They Strike:
I got off a plane leaving from La Guardia and pressed my feet back into Midwestern shag. I went, unannounced, to introduce myself to a woman I'd been trading poems over the phone via voicemail for the past couple of months. I only knew the address to 'Happy Warrior Playground' and that she lived nearby. I made no other reservations-- I've slept on subways before.
"Hey, I'm on 100th and Broadway and was wondering if you know of a good place to have coffee?"
She met me playing harmonica in the park. She sat next to me and we got lost together. Later, we kissed outside of the Harvard Club in the Theater District.
We met through blog.
This World Wide Web has made the world a much smaller place, and has reshaped my understanding of human connection and possibility.
Centuries of ideas available with 2.6 million results found in .876 seconds, its all so overwhelming. But to find one person amidst the cavalcade, to string your fingers together with someone two thousand miles away because the art of your mind, your digital perception of existence melds with theirs; that's a miracle.
I'm in the process of applying for grad school on the east coast, can't take petroleum dreams any longer. I'm thinking MFA, Creative Writing, so I can become a stock broker, or a field medic, or Leonard Cohen's coffee table.
In constant training for a life.
What a lovely piece this is, and I couldn't agree more. All too often I hear people decrying the internet and its supposed killing powers: it's caused (or causing) the death of communities, of proper English, of critical thinking, etc. And yet here we have evidence of connection, of good writing (how often have I told my students that part of learning to write better is simply writing more?), and it warms my heart.
"Don't train for a career--train for a life." -- Again, I couldn't agree more. I've had students who have their eyes fixed on a particular career path and don't see why they have to take classes that aren't nominally connected (e.g. composition, and how I wish I were exaggerating when I say that I've had students who don't see why English composition classes are necessary), and I hate that that appears to be the dominant paradigm, at least at the moment.
I admire people who write about movies, television, music, art, etc. simply because they love the medium, and who write in a way that said love shines through. Here's an anecdote that's only tangentially related: A bit over a week ago I saw what I think was my first movie in the theater for 2010: The Losers. I haven't had that much sheer fun at the movies in a while, I think. We got home, and my partner looked the movie up on Rotten Tomatoes to find that it had a surprisingly low rating. I huffed, then made a declaration along the lines of, "I would suspect a critic who panned that movie of simply not liking movies." My partner read a bit more, then added, "Roger Ebert liked it, though." I spread my palms out in an I-told-you-so gesture: "See? He loves movies!"
:)
Thank you, as always, for your writing, for your thoughtfulness, for turning me on to new writers and films and all that good stuff.
It's almost refreshing to read about the Internet actually helping something. I can't even look at my computer anymore without wondering how much oil it took to make and sighing.
It's also almost refreshing to read that this might be a golden age of something, as opposed to the long, slow descent of, well, pretty much everything I've come to consider this era.
You're largely right, of course. There's enough gems amidst the feces that blogging has justified its own existence, on film criticism and other topics. It's worth pointing out that once upon a time I never would have predicted such to be the case. I'm glad I was wrong.
When I was first exposed to blogging it consisted almost exclusively of material of a highly personal or confessional nature. The kind of stuff you should not post for the world to read. Things have changed. And I find myself in that odd community, despite my expressed wishes and expectations.
Regrettably I doubt I'll ever have a large enough output to be considered a great blogger myself, even if my quality were higher. But oh well, at least I am, despite my long-expressed expectations, in the mix. Now if I could just figure out how to be a decent web-based film critic.
-The Albany Exile
I've done nearly 1,300 articles on my blog in the last two+ years. If pressed as to why, I'd probably come up with some pseudo-comedic, pretend-egotistical explanation about how self-important I am and how the world simply must know my opinions on everything from major world affairs to conspiracy theories to the Bible to the way people on the news pronounce the names of foreign cities (lots of free time on my hands, you ask? Oh, yes).
If truly pressed as to why I maintain a blog that I insist must be updated daily... I don't think I could've answered that. At least not until I read this article by you. I think that, yes, a good portion of why I do it is a simple love of writing. I enjoy sitting back, preparing to write, and then writing (though oddly this habit seems confined to my blog and hasn't yet spilled over onto my novel). The fact that some people seem to enjoy reading what I write is just a nice bonus.
And you know, I don't get paid for the reviews I write for my blog. But I'm a part of Amazon Vine, and that's at least somewhat due to the blogging, since it helped me refine my writing and make better reviews. Film Movement has also began sending me screeners for upcoming movies, and that makes me quite pleased. So while I don't get paid money for my efforts, it's good to know at least some people consider them worthy.
Ebert: I suspect that starting a novel is an excellent way to inspire a writer to spend more time on a blog. Also on sharpening pencils, changing printer ribbons, alphabetizing books, walking the dog, etc.
Hello, A Scientist.
May I humbly correct you in your misunderstanding of what liberal arts means. The reason they're called liberal arts is because in the old (greek/roman) days the slaves were required to learn mathematics and engineering, and the free people were allowed to study literature and arts.
Mathematics and science are specifically not liberal arts. This also holds true in our current society. I received a degree in creative writing from a major University without ever taking a single course in mathematics or science (though of course I took several anatomy and physiology courses for myself but not related to my degree because I'm the son of a cell biologist).
My university had token requirements for math, history, sociology, science, etc., and I was able to get my 22 credits by KLEP exam (sp?) before ever taking a class at University. Please note also that degrees to be a teacher are not the school of liberal arts. They're the school of Education. So perhaps you're confused with teaching degrees?
Dear Roger,
I just wanted to wish you luck in finding more such elegant, original voices in movie criticism around the world, and commend you for bringing them to the forefront via a name such as yours. I'm from India and follow you and a couple of other critics regularly when it comes to English films, and wanted to nudge you in the direction of my favourite Indian critic.
Raja Sen writes for rediff.com, India's biggest website (as you can imagine, that means a fair few people read him.) He's by far the best critic for Bollywood cinema, and his coverage of foreign cinema, Hollywood or otherwise, always seems informed and perceptive. Just as I follow you on twitter, o mighty @ebertchicago, so too do I see @rajasen. (Truly, isn't twitter fantastic? The way it opens up the sharing and dissemination of information... amazing)
You should check out his blog at http://rajasen.wordpress.com and I feel you'll be able to connect with him as a powerful new voice from the subcontinent. I genuinely feel some of his pieces on international cinema are as good as anything published anywhere in the world (here are a couple of my favourites: http://rajasen.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/if-quentin-tarantino-made-the-bible/ and his Avatar review, which I felt has a last line that equals your fantastic closing line for the same film: http://movies.rediff.com/report/2009/dec/18/review-watch-avatar-and-watch-it-in-3d.htm) Also, I guess he would be a good person for you to follow to get a better perspective on Indian cinema.
I know I sound like a fanboy here but then aren't we all fanboys? As someone who loves movies and reading about them, your post motivated me to recommend someone I admire to someone I admire. I'd like to believe that was quite possibly the point of your post, to spread the movie-love.
Thanks for all the writing, keep it coming.
Well, this is a bit self-aggrandizing, I guess, and I apologize for the ream of links below. But since laboring in obscurity is highly overrated, and since you just asked folks not to be shy up above...
For ten years or so now, I've been posting movie reviews every week or so at my blog, http://www.ghostinthemachine.net
There's other stuff there too, but the movie reviews are collated here at: http://www.kevincmurphy.com/reviews.html
Or, you can use the portal I made for them (but don't keep up as well as the blog) at:
http://www.gitmreviews.com
For a long but decent summation of my movie tastes, I did a multi-part and very lengthy "top 100 films of the decade" post round New Year's, that I've reposted at:
http://www.ghostinthemachine.net/decadeinfilm.html
And, my most recent review, as of Friday, is for Juan Jose Campanella's very worthwhile THE SECRET IN THEIR EYES:
http://www.ghostinthemachine.net/006594.html
(FWIW, it, A PROPHET, RED RIDING, TERRIBLY HAPPY, ELLSBERG, and -- Sorry, Roger -- KICK-ASS are my tops of 2010 so far.)
Roger,
Thank you, thank you, thank you for writing this post. It is very similar to my conclusions in a blog post I wrote for my website a few weeks ago (http://www.cinemafunk.com/film-criticism/film-criticism-not-dead-primitive-media-outlets-are-dying.html).
I will be attending SCAD this coming fall for their graduate program in cinema studies (continuing my BA from UCF) and I'm looking forward to increasing my cinematic vocabulary and knowledge about film, so I can become a better critic.
It is the idea that the Internet can allow anyone to post their opinions about anything for minimal costs. What brought a shiver through my body was that you have admitted that amateur bloggers can provide quality thoughts and opinions. While it is difficult to know that I'll be entering spiraling student debt to chase an occupation that appears to be disappearing, I am proud to know that I'm not alone in believing that quality film criticism is ever expanding.
Perhaps that is what is great about the Internet, and how similar it is to the universe. The amount of information and content is ever expanding, into nothing. My soon-to-be student debt much more manageable to know that the future of film criticism will be a collaborative effort, where critics will be working together to navigate through all the content, new films and new mediums that arise.
Thank you for this. All my life, I think, I wanted to be a write, but writing professionally held no charms. Why? The industry, and the thought that someone else would be dependent for their livelihood on my output - agents, publishers, editors. All I wanted was to write and be read, without any gatekeepers or dependents.
The Internet has allowed me to do that, although I think I've made the mistake of following too many publishing industry blogs who disdain 'amateur' bloggers, writers, and self-published authors. I was beginning to be discouraged, but you've reaffirmed why I'm doing this the way I'm doing this.
We really have come round full-circle. Publishing now is much like the 18th century, when anyone with access to a printing press (which was just about everyone) could publish their work. It's a good time to be a writer, whatever field one chooses to write in.
This title of this blog post is correct. This is a golden age of movie critics. I review films on my own blog. I don't think I can agree with the first line of the post, though. Can you really call this a golden age of film criticism when that criticism has less impact than ever on filmmaking and the movie-going public?
Mike
Mr. Ebert,
You might enjoy this blog post I did on the sexual milestones of old Hollywood.
http://tv.gawker.com/5511651/sexual-milestones-of-old-hollywood
The world of blogging is so exciting for people who are writers; it's so sad that many professional blogs traffic in easy cynicism. I hope that I've done my part to offset that a bit.
Your blog is a true pleasure sir, thank you for it.
- Mike
I absolutely love the voice that the internet has given to the masses. It's often easy to be cynical about 'trolls' on message boards and focus on the worst of what's out there. But when you consider how many intelligent, thought-provoking and entertaining writers, videos, and discussions there are out there, it really gives you a sense of how supremely worth-it the internet is.
There are so many films I never would have seen, books I never would have read, thoughts I never would have had -- and yes, video games I never would have played -- if it weren't for the recommendations of people on the internet. I spent a great deal of my time in high school reading your film reviews online, as well as posting on message boards, and I consider both activities to have been invaluable experiences.
When we meet someone in life that we consider 'dumb', it's never because they are uninformed about a particular subject. It's because they have no desire to become informed. Because they are simply happy not-to-know. The internet has given us the extraordinary opportunity to know as much as we want about whatever we want. Curious about something? Just google it. Check out wikipedia. And if it's not something factual we're looking for, but opinions, there are countless message boards with countless users chomping at the bit to give you their thoughts.
It's only recently that I've started to realize how many good things can come from writing on message boards or posting comments on blogs. I'm very excited about pursuing this further. I've just gotten myself a twitter account, and I've been considering starting a blog of my own. When it happens, you can be sure I'll let you know.
Okay, so this is completely unrelated, but I have an idea for your next blog entry:
can graphic novels ever be literature?
ya know, in case you wanna go down that rabbit hole again
What in today's society contributes more and is valued less than a Liberal Arts education?
Graduated from, Roger, graduated from.
I took one film class in college--History of the Twentieth Century Through Film. I referred to myself as passing for an English major (my alma mater doesn't have majors) for grad school. However, film was an ongoing part of my college education; in one class, I saw Streetcar Named Desire and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, among others. As I've said before, I grew up with you as part of my life, and we got our first VCR so long ago that I don't really remember time without it. Film was just there, but it wasn't what I studied.
And then my boyfriend was called up.
I've been on disability for a long time now, and it leaves me with a lot of time, which I fill with movies. Over and over again. As I write this, I have nine items on hold for me at the library, which I will pick up after finishing The Kite Runner and writing my review. I have a Preston Sturges film coming from Netflix this afternoon. (A nice, light touch after what is a very depressing film thus far.) I own hundreds of movies and acquire more all the time.
Film saved me, that time while my love was away. I was desperately afraid for him all the time, but maybe I could drop into Some Like It Hot or Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. (In retrospect, watching The Deer Hunter while he was in Iraq was probably a mistake.) I started writing my journal--I don't like the word "blog," either--every day. No matter what else was going wrong around me, I had my journal to fall back on.
I studied many things in college. Film, yes, but literature and history, anthropology and biology. Everything I could get my hands on. I still read a lot, and a lot of it is nonfiction. Watching films has saved me, but reading is part of who I am, instilled in me even before we had cable.
Roger, this post (and the discovery of davidbordwell.net) could not have appeared at a better time.
This comes at a time where dozens of "critics" are writing about a sinister gathering Dark Age. And they're right, as far as the press is concerned. But pessimists need only look to the internet. As you illustrate here, the World Wide Web has become a forum for great writing - about anything. It doesn't matter what medium. For me,the highest compliment I can give to any work of art is that it "had a lot of ideas in it." The only time this doesn't work is when sheer emotional power overrides the critic's simple power to add and detract from a work's value.
I like people who can manage to produce fair, concise prose. The world badly needs such people. But that's not all. It is not enough to simply express and debate your ideas. One must be able to give them the quality of action.
Discussing the arts like some heavenly focus group is wonderful. I know that now. Looking at your "foreign correspondents," it's amazing how much talent is out there. I don't think anyone would have noticed without this blog; those bloggers at Ebertfest probably had never met each other.
So thanks to Ebert and Bordwell (did I mention Bordwell?). This is an inspiration to write. It's like... oh, never mind.
P.S. "Find out what you know and see what you can do with it." Nice quote. Sounds like a proverb.
May I add? A liberal arts education includes science and math education. All the humanities scholars I know applaud the sciences, while also recognizing how hard it is to know a science deeply without years of study.
But one can have a liberal arts education and major in physics and end up a physicist, e.g. Many of the greatest physicists like Einstein and Feynman have had a remarkable knowledge of music and other arts.
If we want to have a golden age, we won't do that without people who are widely educated in the liberal arts mode.
Hiya Roger.
I, too, am part of the Golden Age of Movie Criticism. I too have a blog where I write film reviews. I focus on forgotten classics that people have either forgotten about or never heard of. I've been doing it for over half a year now. I'm lucky to get 100 clicks a month, and even luckier if they stay on my site for more than five seconds. But I'm content. There's something immensely satisfying about looking at my archive and seeing the list of movie reviews that I have written. I wish that I got more readers, or at least some kind of feedback, but, hey, I'm happy just to write.
Of course, I'm a complete hack. But then again, the only way to build a muscle is to work it.
and *surprise surprise* I model my reviews after your Great Movies reviews. I gotta say, I can't express how happy I was to see a new one this past week. I hope I can meet you someday and thank you personally for your inspiration. But until then, I'll keep on writing.
And writing...
And writing...
Because it's what I love to do.
I wrote a comment earlier with some worries about how the internet affects the way people read and write. I worry that internet writing tends to be--often of necessity--more slapdash than print. And I worry people skim and don't reflect.
But I am really learning from you in the way you are approaching the internet. First, I think you are welcoming the democratic aspects of internet writing in a way that few intellectual/media leaders do. They tend to assume that all us amateurs out there are untrained, unschooled.
I deeply appreciate your comments on education and the liberal arts in particular. It's amazing to see these links made--between public discourse, the internet, education and film criticism.
I love the comparison to Trollope and other literary figures with day jobs.
When I think about the way technology is changing, I am more optimistic about internet writing taking the forefront and print and paper moving to the background. If we could get a good mechanism for reading carefully that would minimize distraction and allow longer, more thoughtful pieces to be written and read I'd be thrilled. Is the iPad going to be that? Maybe for now, it will be.
Erica (feminista09) is amazing and I definitely love supporting my fellow film bloggers.
Amateur bloggers don't do it for the money, and they don't care that they don't get paid for it. Many people just enjoy writing about film, and many of them are actually good at it.
I do this everyday and I adore it. It tires me to hear that film criticism is dead, when I have about two hours worth of excellent film analysis reading every day from fabulous pop culture bloggers.
What excites me about the emerging film bloggers is the varied perspective from which they tackle film criticism. My lived experience as a woman of color is the lens in which I examine my personal film hero Sidney Lumet and I believe a diversity of perspectives is an important aspect of keeping film criticism vital.
I can't even begin to tell you how exciting it was to find a corner of the internet dedicated to De Palma's "Home Movies", one of my favorite movies. They also manage to make me laugh too.
Many film bloggers are tremendously generous with their time, encouragement and support. Thanks for writing about this topic, Mr. Ebert.
It's such a strange dichotomy on one hand as I read this it makes me sad that smart creative people such as yourself will not be able to realistically make a living in film criticism in the future. On the other hand it's the internet that has made it possible for me to read most of what I've read of your work and not just weekly reviews and the blog posts either but also archives. Not a week goes by where I won't inevitably go through your archives to read a review. It's seemless I rarely even think about it but 10 to 15 years ago it probably would have nearly been impossible to get that content.
P.S. As a current law student I find it refreshing that you liked Homer's response. Almost everyone in their first year law school, myself included would say something similar and most people think were a little bit crazy.
Sam E.
Roger, excellent post about a subject near and dear to me. And thank you for the Twitter plug last week on my page. It brought me some new readers, some of whom began commenting immediately about my reviews.
I'm proud to say I'm still a paid and published newspaper movie critic. My little paper doesn't always have room for reviews (page counts and ad revenue are way down, like all newspapers), but my editors keep me around and encourage my entertainment section. When my paper started running fewer of my reviews, I went to an online blog just to keep writing. It's frustrating, though, because I read so many other reviews online that are nothing more than blurbs. Locally, it seems that more and more "critics" in the press screenings are these blurbsters whose reviews have been dumbed down to a graph on the plot, a graph on the actors, and a graph on whether it was "cool" or not. It seems like reviewers are more interested in rating the film than actually analyzing what gives it that rating. Meanwhile, talented critics are getting the boot from newspapers. It's sad.
You've embraced the Internet quite well, though. And I love A.O. Scott's reviews, but especially his Critics' Picks videos -- they're fantastic mini reviews that have embraced a non-print medium. Thanks for recommending some other writers that I can add to my bookmarks.
Roger, I am honored and humbled to have my picture up as one of the internet writers you admire. My admiration for you and your writing grows with every blog post and column you write. Every time I put fingers to keyboard to write more of my book (which will hopefully be finished before I have great-grandchildren) I think of two things: serendipity and Roger Ebert. We who know what it is like not to speak, but to shout from the rooftops through writing have a role model in you.
I appreciate how in touch with blogging culture you are, Roger, because it's so misunderstood by such a large majority of mainstream folks. I'll point you towards my absolute favourite film blog that I only just discovered two days ago. It's worth reading if only for his in depth, incredible Miyazaki retrospective. If you have the time to go through it, it's well worth it:
http://antagonie.blogspot.com
To say the web is transforming our world is to speak in cliches, but what else can you say about it? It seems that all content has becoming accessible on the web. Whether talking about movies, print journalism, television shows, or finally books. They are all on the web and more
people are making their own content, free from an editor, a studio, or a traditional publisher.
At times I find myself worrying about this trend. There was something reassuring about the idea of a newsman like Walter Cronkite, whom America could depend on to tell them how it was. The idea there was one person we could all depend on for the straight dope. Now there are so many online sources for news people have begun to develop catered realities. Yet while that alarms me, I also fine it refreshing that so many people are taking it upon themselves to take such an active part in our democracy.
As someone with artistic aspirations, I find it somewhat sad, that I may have to give up the idea of making my living as an artist; but I also take joy in the idea, that I can just put my work out there for the world to find.
One thing is for sure change seems to be accelerating at warp speed and it is both exciting and scary.
"Don't train for a career--train for a life."
About as useful as advice can get within the space of 10 words.
I'll eventually get out of journalism as a profession, even though it's what I studied in school. Even if I only worked in this business less than three years, I learned lessons about myself in school and in work, and I've certainly learned a lot from the several people and friends who I've had the distinct pleasure of getting to know.
And I've also learned several things from people who I wish I could forget I ever had to deal with.
Supplementing my meager knowledge is a snippet of wisdom from Jean Renoir in "The Rules of The Game." –– "Everyone has their reasons." When I need it, I can take cold comfort in that rationalization of other people's actions, whether they're for business or personal reasons, or for no reason whatsoever.
A joke.
Two married men in their 40s engage themselves in conversation one day. One of the men came from a huge extended family in North Carolina, where it was not unheard of for second cousins, even first cousins, to enter into matrimony and raise a family.
This man, thinking in that moment of the other man's rather attractive wife, asks: "If I happened to have sex with your wife just one time, would that mean we're related?"
The other man responds "No, that'd mean we're even."
I went to Moravian College in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania and knew I wanted to go to law school. So, I decided to double major in history and political science believing both areas prerequisites for the study of law. What a mistake.
I tell everyone that I know that I should have double-majored in English and English. Those who write well succeed in law school. Those who do not write well suffer and the climb to being a competent writer is more difficult.
This blog really struck a chord with me. As an undergraduate in film studies, I often (and by "often" I mean "everyday") get the feeling that I'm learning something for which professions do not exist. I love cinema, I love writing about cinema, but like everyone else, I'm going to need to make a living somehow. I worry about this. A lot.
I have major doubts. What can I do with this degree? Why does film studies matter? Should I pick up a second major? Will I live in a cardboard box?
I think David Bordwell's advice may be the solution to my problem. The goal should be, for now, to simply learn as much as I can about whatever I can. Then, I just "see what I can do with it."
Anyway, thanks for this post. Really, I needed a little encouragement (it's finals week).
Roger,
I have devoured nearly every word you've written since my freshman or sophomore year in college (1997-1998). Back in the day I had dreams of one day being a professional print film critic and even making my living off it. After a brief meeting with the Arts Editor at the New London Day to show some reviews I'd written for my college paper, I understood how unlikely it was I was ever going to make a living off of film criticism.
Years ago my goal was to build a website and at the very least build readership, get to attend critics screenings (so I wouldn't be shelling out $10 a pop for the films I saw) and feel like I was contributing something to film criticism.
I put that goal on hold in early 2006 when I decided to move to Spain to experience living abroad for a time. Now I'm married with plans to return to my native New York in the near future and I finally decided to just go ahead and set up my own blog which I've dubbed Mostly Movies. It is so called because in addition to reviewing any new film I see and trying to keep up on film news that I find interesting, I will also touch on issues of personal interest to me.
After 4 weeks I've averaged about one post per day and I hope to keep it up. My wife and I have a baby on the way this fall, so who knows what will happen then, but I at least wanted to get going now. Hopefully, once we're in New York I will devote more time to building a proper website with regular reviews and features but still containing a blog element.
Reading this entry of yours has given me hope that there is a readership out there for my writing. Occasionally I sift through some of the film related sites and blogs out there and I find lots of bad writing with no real focus. I intend to take writing about cinema quite seriously and hope to produce some work that is academic or scholarly in nature.
I especially like your inclusion of what David Bordwell had to say, "Forget about becoming a film critic. Become an intellectual, a person to whom ideas matter. Read in history, science, politics, and the arts generally. Develop your own ideas, and see what sparks they strike in relation to films." This is the approach I strive to take toward film. I always aim to broaden my knowledge on a range of topic and find there just isn't enough time in the day to pursue it all.
I also really liked your addendum to what Bordwell had to say, "Don't train for a career--train for a life. The career will take care of itself, and give you more satisfaction than a surrender to corporate or professional bureaucracy. If you make careers in that world, you will be more successful because your education was not narrow." This is absolutely not how the Spanish university system works. Generally, students decide at 17 what they want to do professionally and they go to university to study that and they're basically stuck in that field.
Personally I prefer the American system in which any decent college education prepares students to think, analyze, dissect, problem solve, be critical, read and write. This is a long-winded way of saying I agree that studying the humanities is a great way to prepare yourself for life and the broader your knowledge-base, the better the critic you'll be whether it's cinema, books, theater, music or art.
My new blog is at http://movielistmania.blogspot.com
To everyone, please come and read and leave a comment once in a while.
Roger, keep writing as long as you can. And thanks for what you've given us up to now.
You're in a very powerful position, Ebert, acting as you do as a hinge between the traditional worlds of print and mass media film criticism, and the emerging community of enthusiasts that's reaching new heights with populist digital media. It's refreshing to see a respected member of the old guard pulling so enthusiastically for the new generation.
I've subscribed to a number of interesting movie blogs recently, but I'm starting to think I should shift my reading. Too many of my blogs are tipster, reblog-type blogs, with less of a focus on interesting writing and more of a tendency to repeat a press release and add a few lines of snarky commentary. This type of criticism is one of the trends that is obscuring the great potential of the digital ecosystem... too many people are using the medium to piggyback on industry news highlights. And I think when antagonistic editorialists speak negatively about bloggers (like Kevin Smith did in his twitter meltdown a month or two back), they're talking about these reblogging sites.
They should take your advice and read some of these bloggers who genuinely love writing. I intend to do so, at least.
This is a nice overview of the modern state of popular criticism. Just as the Internet has changed film criticism, it has changed music criticism (you allude to this near the end of the article, of course). As a long-time record collector and short-time music blogger, I read numerous Web magazines every day--Pitchfork, PopMatters, etc. Most of the time when I read a review at these sites, I don't even notice the critic's name. The personal opinions I respect the most, then, come from independent bloggers doing their work out of passion and not out of profit. The democratic nature of the Internet means that plenty of uninformed folks spend time writing; but, there are gems out there and when I find one I return to his or her page faithfully and regularly--in one case for over 10 years now.
My movie reviews are up at www.typewriterriot.blogspot.com
I think it unofficially started with islandhome's review included in your review of Mad Money:
for the girls most will like it
and the men will not mind it much
Anyway, the internet has changed; strangely, I feel like a stranger as it becomes more open. I guess I'll always have notepads and pencils. I've enjoyed your blog.
From the print shops of hot lead operations to blogging for world wide web is a pretty amazing progression to me.
Congrats on your Webby Award, Roger!
It's true you have a great site, but don't let it go to your head - it's still not art ;)
@ "a scientist"
As an English Professor who teaches numerous Compostion classes, I wholeheartedly agree with your comment. I have noticed that Math and Science majors are often better able to organize their thoughts in a logical manner precisesly because of thier training than students in humanities majors. However, the grammar seems equally dismal among all majors, except for some strange reason, nursing majors. For some reason, those nurses in training can understand the benefits of writing in active vs. passive voice.
Dear Ebert, I just want to say thank you,and I mean it.
As a High School student that just got a scholarship to go to college in the United States this August, this is the finest and best timed blog entry I could have read.
As a 19 year old who's first and only passion has always been films, writing about them,discussing them, this blog entry is the most helpful advice regarding my future that someone has given me.
Ever since I care to remember, I have known what I wanted to do with my life: Leave this country, go to college in the USA and watch as many films as possible and then write about them in print or online. "You should study something else", or "Go for something that will give you money" are some of the reasons my family has given me to take me away from this path. But I love movies you see,even being from a country where few ever open(El Salvador), I have always found the film watching experience something that soothes my soul and makes me feel alive. But are they right,and should I abandon this pursuit of mine and comform to society's motto that you need money to be successful? My mind has been studying this possibility since I got a scholarship notice about a month ago.
And now I read your blog. And I'm moved by it,and inspired and more sure about what I am going to do with my education.
From the bottom of a young filmlover's heart,Gracias!!
There's only one film critic for me...
I haven't updated my blog in five months now, this is putting a fire under my butt to get some more entries written.
I actually started a blog because I do believe that blogging is the way of the future and I don't think we've yet realized its full potential (now if I could just find the time to update it more often). I teach Freshman composition at a university (where I'm also pursuing a PhD in Rhetoric and Composition) and one of the things I've learned from this line of work is that, contrary to popular belief, reading is not on the decline. In fact, the youth of the world are reading and writing more than they ever have in human history and blogging is one of the reasons for that.
It's good to be aware that we are in the midst of what is, at the very least, the greatest revolution in literacy since the invention of the printing press, if not the greatest revolution in literacy since the invention of writing. What you talk about here, Roger, is one of the reasons for that. Not only does it mean we have more great writers than we've ever had before (so many that its actually a bit overwhelming, and a bit saddening that so few of them will gain recognition for their efforts) but, as has already been stated here several times (especially by Tom Dark) the rise of blogging is tearing down boundaries and making it that much more difficult for us to hate each other.
One reason why Roger is my only critic:
Here's a small excerpt from his review of Hotel (2003):
"In "Hotel," made in 2001 but just now receiving a U.S. release, Figgis shows the film-within-a-film on digital video, goes outside it with conventional celluloid, and sometimes presents the same scene with messy location sound and then polished post-production sound."
He also knows a lot about what's going on technically. I don't really pay attention to his star-ratings. I look for what's interesting about the review because then it's probably going to be an interesting movie.
It is a great honor to be included on this page. I linked to it on my blog and here is what I wrote:
When people ask me how to become a movie critic I say, "I just waved my magic wand. You're a movie critic! All you have to do is write reviews." And if they ask me how to become a good movie critic, I say, "It takes more than loving movies. It takes more than having opinions. It takes more than knowing a lot about movies, though all of those things are important. You have to be a person with a full life, a vitally engaged head, and a heart that is open to experience and learning. I can't bear talking to people who think they know movies because they can keep all the IMBD data in their heads.
A movie critic is first and foremost a writer. And if you ever want anyone to read your reviews they had better be lively, informative, and vivid. Most of the movies you see won't be very entertaining or filled with insight, but your reviews have to be both, every time." Watch a lot of movies, yes, but read a lot of books and live a lot of life because you will need all of that. The readers deserve it, and you know what? The movies and the people who make them do, too.
"Don't train for a career--train for a life." Excellent advice Ebert. From what I've read it seems most of my generation isn't going to have the chance to have careers in the traditional sense. I heard somewhere the average youth today will hold at least 14 different jobs by the time they are 30 or some other jolting figure. Training for a life makes those transitions easier, and the ride more enjoyable. As for on-line critics, I read you and Dustin Putman at www.themovieboy.com I always love comparing your interviews. As always, great blog. I look forward to your recent posts.
Thank you for this. It means a lot. Required reading alongside your little rule book.
Another post that is right on the money. IN the four plus months that I've been running my own blog I've discovered some of the nicest people and best criticism there is out there. It's a shame that we don't have that romantic images of critics being newspaper men anymore but criticism will live on without it. I know five years ago I wanted nothing more than to be a big paper film critic but by the time I graduated four years later there were barely any newspaper jobs and certainly none of them were for criticism. That's why I started my blog, so I can continue to love and explore film while still trying to make a decent living at something else. So far so good.
"Don't train for a career--train for a life."
I am a classical musician who thinks this is wonderful advice. Many musicians these days are content to learn an instrument and block out everything else that goes on in the world. In the end, it seems like the ones that play in the most interesting ways are those who have explored the liberal arts and taken some math and science classes.
I should have this hanging on a banner above my piano.
Roger:
As a young and aspiring film critic, your advice means the world to me. Thank you.
Shaun Henisey- A Movie A Week
Education (in the broad definition of the term, not just narrow formalized schooling) is the key to a happy and successful life. And curiosity about others and the world is the only pathway to meaningful education. Many people are passionate about films, and many are skilled in writing about them. But one sore spot festers: for many critics, print or online, film is virtually all they know. They never seem to place film in a larger social or literary or dramatic or historical or political context. Now, this is fine for most films, many of which have no lofty aims or interesting origins. But some films demand more than facile analysis of the cinema syntax. Which is why the best film critics seem to have the broadest minds, like Stanley Kauffmann, James Agee, Pauline Kael, and others that need not be named here.
So, maybe some film critics would be better served, and could better serve their readers if, instead of watching The Seventh Seal or Persona for the fifth or sixth times, they would pick up a volume of Strindberg or Chekhov, both of whom had enormous influence on Bergman. To truly understand Eisenstein, one must have at least some knowledge and understanding of where and when (and for whom) he worked. And so on.
I used to really want to be a film critic; it seems like such a wonderful career. But, I'm happy now taking film criticism classes while working on my astrophysics major. It turns out there's another field that inspires awe in me. Thanks for the great post, Mr. Ebert.
Dear Roger;
Congratulations on your well deserved Webby Award.
Thank you for putting your Ebertfest videos on YouTube. I will watch them all.
How great is Kim Masters! I found her on Huffington Post then her blog and now on the Ebertfest videos. Brains, talent and beauty. My goodness.
Can you image being a young writer and have one of your idols not only praise your work but distribute it to his audience? Yeah. I knew you could.
Ebert: That's Kim Mogran. Her blog is www.sunsetgunshots
Roger,
As an uncertain and somewhat floundering liberal arts major, your words offer more reassurance than most. It can certainly be tough. My father is an engineer. My four roommates are studying biology, math, computer science and engineering. Finally, being middle-class, I often feel as though I don't "deserve" the luxury to study something I'm (mostly) truly passionate about. It's encouragement like yours that makes the difference.
Shane
Hmm. Guess my last comment wasn't approved, and unclear why.
Nonetheless, ten years of extensive movie reviews collated at http//www.kevincmurphy.com/reviews.html, with a 2000-2009 roundup at http://www.ghostinthemachine/decadeinfilm.html.
Glad you've embraced the web. Now we need to work on video games...
Roger, after reading this article, I'm fully convinced to shift my blog's language into English. I'm never going to be as popular with Spanish, just because I haven't found many blogs in it that write as deeply about the movies as I've read in Anglo-Saxon. May I suggest that there's something compellingly...erotic about a sentence in Anglo-Saxon.
I'm still not able to write because of school labor, but I justed wanted to you to know, that for now on, my blog is called "Confessions of an Amateur", and it's for you and for everyone who loves film.
And BTW, what do you think about the abandonament of Salon by Stephanie Zachareck? I hope she's okay. She's really great.
I salute you,
A.C
Ebert: Funny. I think Spanish and all the Legtin tongues are erotic.
As an aspiring student film critic myself, saying that this is the golden age of movie critics is quite strong as it goes against, not the pessimism but more of the ambivalence I've heard about becoming a critic from others as well as the own fears I've held onto. But throughout your piece, you make a great case and your words are reassuring, most particularly in the David Bordwell quote. As Jim Emerson originally quoted that statement on his blog, I commented there that I was that student Mr. Bordwell mentioned following the panel discussion at the 2009 Ebertfest. Since Ebertfest and many other times as well, I've grown as a critic and as a journalist. I'm afraid that I may not be diversifying myself enough by studying journalism at Indiana University, but with my upcoming job as the co-editor of IU's entertainment publication with the student newspaper, I think I'm playing things pretty close to the chest and having fun figuring life and my interests out as I go.
Thanks again Roger for continuing to inspire me and my work every step of the way.
More blogs to check out! And I wonder why my novel is not finished yet...;-)
The funny thing is, I started writing my blog in order to sell off the remaining copies of my poetry book. Even funnier, I couldn't figure out how to set up the Paypal option on my blog until several months after I wrote my first entry.
My blog's one-year anniversary occurs at the end of this month, so I'll be sure to include a post dealing with the growth of my blog at that time, but I suspect that many of the bloggers whose avatars are featured in this entry and whose blogs are featured in the comments will be beneficiaries of the "Ebert effect," in which the readership of one's blog (or one particular post) increases due to the attention given to it by Roger Ebert. What I also suspect is that, through this post, they will discover other bloggers, whose blogs they will then read and comment on, which will further connect all of these different people from different backgrounds and different places. Makes me wonder what John Lennon would have thought of the World Wide Web. After all, isn't it like imagining "there's no countries," since the Internet does away with borders?
I still haven't sold any poetry books through my blog, but I'm having a blast blogging on every topic imaginable.
And congratulations on your Webbie Award, Roger!
If I knew why I started writing my blog in the first place I might not need to write it anymore. So, in a sense, I'm writing about films to figure out why I'm writing about them. But I also know that the process of writing my blog over the past several years has wound up reigniting my passion for film, possibly making it stronger than it ever was before. I’m glad that there are others out there who feel the way I do. As long as this continues, true love for cinema and everything it can be will never die.
I can be found at Mr. Peel's Sardine Liqueur
http://mrpeelsardineliqueur.blogspot.com/
Do I need to apologize for not flying to Ebertfest? My excuse? Well, the Academy Foundation hosts the only screenwriting contest that means anything in Hollywood, the Nicholl Fellowship. Deadline is May 1. Last year, I started too late. I had pre-paid my entry fee, so I posted a half-screenplay. This year, I said I wasn't going to do that. I was going to submit a worthy screenplay, just to prove that I can meet a deadline. And the week before May 1, that's what I was doing. On May 1, the entry deadline, my (since discarded and replaced) screenwriting software decided to quit working, and my laptop went to CHKDSK and Blue Screen of Death every time I tried to log on. OK, I'm sorry I didn't make Ebertfest this year. Nothing personal, seriously.
I need to talk about Iron Man 2. It doesn't take a lot of body strength to wear a suit of armor. If there is a guy flying around out there in Iron Man's armor, the essential requirement is, he needs to be the smartest guy in the room. He needs the courage or the sarcastic wit to look at Congress, and political correctness, and a few other things, and say, "You guys aren't seeing the big picture." That's what I tried to capture in my screenplay. OK, my take on the Nicholl. After reading some of the past winners, my impression is that the judges made up their minds after reading the first ten pages of each script, and didn't bother to judge the whole thing. I mean, that's how you get 6,000 scripts down to a manageable 250 or so after the first round of judging. You say, "I read the first ten pages of this script and it knocked my socks off, so I gave it a pass." So, in my first ten pages, I described how Major Hasan killed thirteen people at Fort Hood. From his first shot to being flat on his back with four police bullets in him, was about ten minutes in real life. What could be more "knock you socks off" than an Army psychiatrist shouting "God is Great" in traditional Islam language and then shooting at unarmed American soldiers? Hopefully, every other script in the competition will start with ten pages of make-believe. I started with ten pages of "this really happened" and while it's not politically correct to blame Islam for terrorism, that's why it happened. And I'm just not politically correct enough to read about a "theology prof" who teaches Islam at a college level, without responding, "Islam is complete nonsense. There are no supernatural creatures called Jinn. There is no Allah that rants for days about condemmning Jews and Christians to Hell Fire of eternal torment. How can anyone teach religion at a college level without using the words 'nonsense' and 'terrorist agenda'?" Anyway, that's what I want to see when Iron Man lifts his face plate. A guy who actually knows what's going on, and since his original agenda was escaping from Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan, maybe he will actually be able to pull of the "world peace" thing.
Ebert: “changing printer ribbons,”??
Uhmm, you’re still undermining your best thread’s contention that you are qualified to judge the art-worthiness of videos.
Okay, so you’ve purchased the new PC, and you’ve loaded it with ChessMaster. Now you know for a fact that two World Chess champions have—on their tutorials on the program—clearly stated that chess is “an art form.” . . .?
This is a golden age for those who appreciate good film criticism. That's for sure. Can read the work of the first (regularly paid) movie critic, Mordaunt Hall. Or I can enjoy a most talented newcomer like Lights Camera Jackson. Listen to contemporary voices or those from the past. No matter. The best are destined to remain vibrant and timeless. Check out sometime Hall's April 31, 1930 review of "All Quiet on the Western Front"(NY Times archives). Then compare it with James Berardinelli's thoughts on the movie from a couple of month's ago(reelviews.net). Or enjoy Manny Farber's acerbic POV(Farber On Film). Also can't help but wonder what, down the road, L-C-J's take will be on AQotWF and film criticism in general. Just hope his adult reviews are written in a kinder time. Now that would truly be a golden age.
"All that belongs to the past in the same way as horse-mounted cavalry and India clipper ships."
This is my third year teaching English to first year Saudi university students. The first week of class, I had them decorate the room with the alphabet. Of course they know the letters of the alphabet, but I call this "The Sophisticated Alphabet." In elementary school, C is for Cat. But with freshmen medical students, C is for Cardiovascular System. Below the letter, they drew a picture or diagram related to their word. Below that, they had to do a little research to summarize the meaning of the word in a paragraph. I handed out markers, pens, crayons, colored pencils, glitter glue, construction paper. "Teacher, we're not children. We're at university," one of them announced. Watching these students draw was in itself an immense pleasure, because art is not encouraged, and definitely not taught to them, anywhere. The only Saudi artists you will find are artists who might just suffocate if they were to keep their talent locked up in their bloodstream.
I am looking up right now at the card that reads "B is for Bronchi" and I wish you could see me grinning. I wish you could see the beautiful B, in jet black and bright red, striped like a bloodied zebra- the bottom left pointed downward diagonally in an artistic statement, stating simply "I am not your average B. I am an artfully-rendered B," and the pink and yellow lungs that, from where I am standing, seem like they could start twitching and pumping any minute now.
There was a freak thunderstorm last night in Riyadh and the government shut down all schools today, but teachers in my department were still required to show up. So I'm standing here in this room, missing my students, but with an uncanny feeling that they're all still here, looking back at me from the walls. One of my students completed his alphabet letter at home. He had constructed it on the Internet, and I rejected it. He's not happy with me about that, but I told them all from day one that I wanted this to be an organic class, and I had rules for the alphabet cards. No computer effects.
I read a news article recently that claimed many students today don't write anymore, and many schools are going to stop teaching it, because computers are the future. Handwriting is a lost art. My students have biographies up on the wall, attached to photos of each of them, and all but one of the essays have been hand-written. The student who printed his essay promised to redo it in pen.
I suppose that this white board with markers is convenient, but I miss chalkboards and sticks of chalk.
People read books from Kindle, or whatever you call it. I like feeling pages between my fingers. I like the smell of new books, and the smell of old books.
People download all their music from websites and then, if they feel a need to look up lyrics, find them on the Internet. I like buying CDs and looking at the artists' photos and drawings and lyrics in the booklets.
What does it mean, when technology is better than it ever was before, but people don't seem to be any happier? Thank God I have two living plants in this classroom, sitting by an open window. It took some wheeling and dealing to get the window open. The university's regulations include keeping all windows locked, to retain air from the AC. Fine; but some days, that old air outside is just right.
I was a movie critic for a couple of years in a local radio program, and it meant a lot to my formation as a wannabe journalist and film lover. For a long time I've been thinking of starting a blog, but, as things go, I have never found the right moment to do it. Until now :)
Thank you, as always, you have written an amazing entry
It's good to see you include Rotten Tomatoes within your examples, Roger. I'm a moderator at the RT message boards, and we've always tried to maintain a lively and thoughtful amount of conversation and/or debate about movies and storytelling at our forum. Obviously the format is less conducive to a strict "here's my review" blog structure of critical expression, but I would argue that many of our posters have grown as critical thinkers by virtue of the reviews/opinions they've posted and then discussed and analyzed.
You bring up the wealth and widespread accessibility of critical thought in this blog post, and I think you're dead on with it, but I also think it should be highlighted that artists themselves are also looking to the new technology for feedback and personal growth in what they do. I've met quite a few professionals in the animation industry who've told me that they're doing just that. I imagine the same is probably true for Hollywood writ large. With the democratization of critical thought that the Internet gives us, the pool of feedback for artists to pull from is significantly greater, especially for younger aspiring artists. Young filmmakers and storytellers can now get a much greater sense of what their audience wants and how they will respond to certain things and choices, allowing for the possibility to self-adjust in ways that used to belong only to time and experience. This is naturally a matter more of potential use than required use, but one would hope that as much as the critical profession has expanded its bounds in the way your article here describes, so would filmmaking itself respond in kind.
Also, since we're sharing links, I may as well put one up. Obviously I don't have a straight blog, given what I said about the RT forum structure, but here's my last best-of list for both 2009 and the last decade itself: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=1326602
"Don't train for a career--train for a life. The career will take care of itself, and give you more satisfaction than a surrender to corporate or professional bureaucracy. If you make careers in that world, you will be more successful because your education was not narrow."
Good advice. In fact, excellent advice. I'd suggest only a tweak, based on my 30-plus years of professional experience: If you train for a life (as you should), don't expect it to help you in the corporate world. By and large, those who excel in the lofty but airless realms of management and the executive class are careerist sociopaths. Developing a broad appreciation and love for the grand banquet of life and the arts will enlarge your heart and mind to a degree that you just won't fit into a corporate mold.
Man, this makes me want to start posting again on my blog. I used to post alot on movies and comedy...but once people started saying they enjoyed it, and asking when I'd post again, it began to feel like work / pressure...I need to get over that. Maybe this post of yours will be the impetus I need.
...congrats on the Webby!
Roger,
Are Golden Ages normally so bittersweet?
You mention that many of the amateur critics are better writers than the ones who are linked to at IMDb, which has low standards. If anyone wants to help improve those standards, I learned a couple of years ago that all you have to do is sign up for a free account at IMDb, and then it takes only about a minute to submit a new review to their "External Reviews" section, either your own or someone else's you admire. The first thing I do after I publish a review to my blog is submit it there, because that is where I get a large chunk of my hits from. My most popular entry linked on IMDb is for my review of the HBO film "Taking Chance," on which I'm the number one critic listed. (The list is only up to fifteen reviews, but I'm still number one!) The added bonus: When someone clicks on your review from IMDb you can be sure the clicker has at least a passing interest in your opinion, as opposed to the search engine hits I get from queries like "amy adams nude."
My proudest moment as a blogger is when I receive a legitimate comment from a stranger (and by legitimate I only mean non-spam). When I see that I've been read and engaged by someone I've never met, that's when I feel myself starting to escape the vacuum of my own thoughts into real discourse.
Another good resource is Lulu.com. I've self-published three books there (two collections of film reviews and one collection of short stories). It doesn't cost any money to publish; they don't print a copy until someone orders it, so you're not trying to sell a thousand copies from out of a stockpile in your garage or attic. So far, the only person who has bought copies of my work are myself, my father, and a friend of mine, but I've made them available to download for free. However, even without readers, there's a special satisfaction in holding a bound paperback version of your work. Even if no one else reads them, no one can take away from me that I wrote them; there they are, not just stored on a hard drive or server somewhere but in my hands, tangible and tactile.
During my earliest years of writing (from Batman stick-figure picture books in the second grade to my "X-Files" parody series I started in 1995, when I was eleven), I was my only available readership. I wrote for myself until I became a critic and then the editor for my college newspaper's entertainment section. Still nothing for my fiction writing. Then I discovered message boards, particularly the GoldDerby community, which discusses entertainment awards but also is home to posters I respect for their views on film and television (and some pesky flamers here and there). Then I discovered Lulu. And then I discovered blogging. (Readership of some of my fiction has gone up to as high as three whole people, but most of it I still seem to just write for myself.)
I don't make any money from writing, except for the $40 I made helping a colleague write a short bio for his personal website a few months ago, which was forty of the best dollars I've ever made. I had the film critic dream for a while, but in the last year have decided it's not the way I'm likely to make a living. Five or ten years ago that realization might have been crushing, but it doesn't bother me as much now because I know I can do it anyway. I just need to figure out what job I'll get to support my writing habit. That's kind of scary, knowing what you love to do and not knowing what to do to get by. But it's also kind of liberating to not write with money in mind. I'll just continue to write the way I've always written: what I feel like, how I feel like, because I feel like it.
I've got one loose sort of novel finished, which I just need to format and edit before publishing. It's a fictionalized, episodic account of my college experience -- a comedy, because when I write dramas about myself I end up self-indulgent and whiny. I've got another one in the works that will probably be done sometime in the next few years, something completely different: a fantasy/adventure saga. Those may or may not be any good (I have it under good, independent authority that, in general, I don't suck), but even if they're not it's no matter. I've always got something in the pipeline.
Roger, this entry alone is reason enough for you to win a Webby. It's a pity that the rise of so much excellent unpaid film criticism has been accompanied by the decline of anyone getting paid for it, but trust you to focus on the silver lining instead of the dark cloud. Well deserved, and congratulations!
I think this blog post identifies one of the "value added" elements that could go into the new movie review program that you are developing: your knowledge of the universe of new-media movie critics.
Up until now, you have acted mostly as a source of information for the rest of us about movies themselves. I used to watch "At the Movies" to find out what films were worth watching among the batch currently in theaters. Nowadays, that service is less necessary than it used to be, for two reasons:
It's a bit like Mazlow's hierarchy of needs. My lower-level needs (finding films, and knowing which ones to watch) are easily fulfilled. I'm therefore increasingly interested in a higher-level need, namely accessing the intellectual discourse about films. But like most people, I don't have a ton of time to spend finding the best critics and best writing about films. That's where the expertise that you have acquired (evident in this blog post) becomes valuable.
You have always been a curator of knowledge. In the past, you were a curator of information about movies themselves. Now, however, I think you are becoming a curator of information about the people who write and talk about movies. That is perhaps the most valuable specialized knowledge that you have. I'm hoping that your future program (and this site) increasingly becomes a vehicle for sharing that information, and building a social network of film lovers.
Here's proof of what Roger says. Online readers ferreted out my detailed appreciation of Sofia Coppola's historic Oscar nomination for Best Director --- even when it was a) years out of date and b) buried in a film website devoted entirely to another subject (Oregon film history). This post has nothing to do with the rest of the site - it stands alone - how did people find it? I conjecture that the steady flow of great grass roots online film writing has produced its own vast network of equally gifted online film readers.
There's something so great about being able to vent after watching a (good or bad) movie and having people actually hear you, even though sometimes I wonder if I'm my own best audience, in other words, if I love what I write that should be enough, having other people read it is one hell of a bonus.
Our greetings from Ohio to you and Chaz. You are both very missed.
Roger, this post has invigorated me from my slump.
I decided to start my film blog because it's what I love and know, and when jobs are scarce you can't just sit by while the world turns without you. Lately, I felt my blog was lost at a sea full of more important issues, but thanks to you I realize we're all a community with great opportunities just a post away. Thank you for being a leader in out community.
Also, much congratulations on your Webby.
Roger, you made me think of two famous essays:
In "Why I Write," Orwell mentions a "literary exercise" he kept up for years: as he puts it, "the making up of a continuous 'story' about myself, a sort of diary existing only in the mind" made up of "a mere description of what I was doing and the things I saw." He concludes, "I seemed to be making this descriptive effort almost against my will, under a kind of compulsion from outside"--and by "outside" he means writers he admired.
In Joan Didion's "Why I Write," she admits that she stole Orwell's title in part because she "like[s] the sound of the words"; they "share a sound, and the sound they share is this:
I
I
I."
Both essays confess that writing is an all-absorbing compulsion, an assertion of self and the hard work of building a public self that tries to satisfy that compulsion. I'm reminded of the signs NYC utility workers used to place at their worksites: "Dig We Must." It is the inner narrative/mantra of every writer, the necessary passion. Can you dig it?
p.s. Happy Belated Roger Ebert Day! That was one movie-geeked Governor on stage with you.
Mr. Roger Ebert
Hello Sir. My name is Austin, but my friends call me Auti. I'm 18 years old and I'm from the Philippines. Like you, I love movies.
It's been quite some time now since I started reading your blog, and I have never seen so many comments on a blogsite before. I've always wanted to leave a comment on your site, but I once told myself that I will leave a comment on the day I read an entry that would mean to me the most. This is that entry.
It was October of 2008 were I encountered the day that would change my life. My classmate handed me a letter from her uncle. I only met her uncle once when he helped me, along with my other classmates, with a school project. He asked me through the letter that he knows someone that is in need of a student that loves movies. I consider it a miracle that he thought of me, because on that one day that we spoke, I mentioned only once or twice that I love to watch movies.
Turns out, his friend is planning to start a movie-reviewing website where the critic is but a simple college student who is in love with film. I took the job in a heartbeat. I started watching movies and reviewing them afterward. By that time, I knew so little of movies, but I wasn't aware of it. I had not discovered the internet yet and the community of movie-lovers that inhabit it.
I live in an average family, so we couldn't afford to install internet at our own home. I went to internet cafes and researched about film criticism. There, I found you. One of the first reviews of yours I have ever read was your review of Shoot 'em Up and Deuce Bigalow 2. I also encountered so many critics and went on to read so many "user reviews" from many sites.
By that time, I became aware of my lack of knowledge at movies. I discovered that IT WAS a miracle that I got this job as a film critic. Most of the the people from the "user review" category are far more qualified than I am.
So, I started to watch more movies and read more reviews. I did this because I was afraid to receive hate mail, not because I love movies. Time went by, and I started to watch more movies and read more reviews because I began to love movies exceedingly more.
You, Mr Ebert, has helped me more than you know and will ever know. I thank you.
I still have that job, and I cherish it every day. And when I read back on some of my first reviews, I feel embarrassed at myself and I am scared to have them published. For example, the last sentence of my review for "Shoot 'em Up", (I believe that's the 3rd review I ever made in my life) was "Shoot 'em Up is one of the few movies I will remember when I grow old."
Oh, how wrong was I. Though I am sure that I will remember that film till I'm old, I'm not sure however, if that is "one of the few". I have discovered greater films that are much more memorable than Shoot 'em Up. Though I am embarrassed of that review, I am grateful of it because at least it has showed me how much I have grown as a film critic. I know I have so so so much to learn. And I don't plan to stop anytime soon.
Currently, I write 4 reviews every 2 weeks. i e-mail them to the uncle of my classmate which he e-mails to his friend. I wish I can do more, but school hinders me to do so, and I am only required to make 8 reviews a month.
I love movies so much. And I love writing reviews, too. I've always thought about becoming a full-time film critic one day. But as I finished reading your entry, that dream on going "full-time" might not be able to support me. I still want to become a film critic, full-time, part-time, whatever. :) You have inspired me Mr Ebert. You have no idea how many Roger Ebert quotes I have in my head ready to just pop out anytime a person claims that Transformers 2 is a good movie, or something like that.
I claim to work as a film critic for a movie-reviewing site, but as you may have noticed, I don't have a URL. That is because the movie-reviewing site I am talking about is not up and running yet. My boss tells me that we don't have enough reviews to start a site, and with 8 reviews a month, I am not sure if we are going to be able to keep that site once it's up.
I think I have written somewhere around 200 movie reviews, and half of them are written by the version of me that thought Shoot 'em Up is "one of the few" movies I will remember when I grow old. So I think I have about only a hundred competent reviews.
Please forgive me Mr Ebert if my comment is too long. It's just, I've been hindering myself for too long from leaving a comment at your blog. It's 1 AM from where I am, and I'm getting that same feeling that I got from October of 2008. I hope I get to post a comment here one day that does have the URL I'm dreaming of. Thank you, Mr Ebert, for loving movies and sharing it with the world. Thank you for your time. :)
I shall do my best to make comment #2 shorter. Have a great day. :)
Roger,
Thank you for your inspiring post. It is so refreshing to hear a journalist of your caliber encourage bloggers rather than dismiss them. Usually, the only time "real" writers want to talk about us is when they're decrying the "end of journalism."
Like your wonderful Far-Flung Correspondents, I don't make my living by writing about movies. During the day I work as a marketing consultant. For the past year, however, I have been privileged to be a correspondent for the entertainment news website Screen Rant (http://screenrant.com).
Thus far, I have enjoyed my work as a "movie blogger" tremendously. While I primarily cover general news, I do occasionally get the opportunity to review movies, and I believe that with each new review I am gaining more confidence in my skills.
If you have the time, I would be interested to see what you think of my review of Harry Brown (which, incidentally, we both saw at the same 70 E. Lake Street screening).
http://screenrant.com/harry-brown-reviews-robf-57251/
It is always a pleasure to read your blog and I can't begin to describe how much your work has influenced my perception of not only film, but all art.
Sincerely,
Rob Frappier
Can it really be called a golden age when no one gets paid? It's a golden age without the gold.
Reply to: April 1 was my 42nd anniversary at the Chicago Sun-Times. I wouldn't bet on either one of us making it to 50. But the internet has transformed me - Ebert
I understand you're getting a Webby as Person of the Year, for your presence on the Web.
I occasionally talk about screenwriting. But before you write a script, it's important to have a place where you can discuss the things that matter. A place where you can voice an unpopular opinion and have to defend it. A place where you learn the "politically correct" view is not always the truth.
And then, when you sit down to write a script, you actually know something. You know the facts, and you know who is lying about the facts.
If you don't do this, then you get movies which are written by people who are limited to a knowledge of other movies and what they watched on TV last night. And, in Randy's case, the nonsense his father preaches in sunday School class.
If you want to justify the Awards, that's how you do it. Provide a forum where the real issues are discussed. In an earlier blog entry, you said you would go to dinner parties, where you knew better than to raise certain topics out of fear of offending people.
On a site like this, you don't have to worry about offending people. If they don't enjoy seeing the hot topics debated intelligently, they wouldn't be here.
I know you are coming from this position as a writer, but what I find most exciting about this golden age you're referring to is not that anyone can "publish" their writing on the internet, but that we can discuss it, too. For example, I love your essays on this blog, but the comments--taken as a whole--are almost always better and more interesting. I know not everywhere is like that, but it's true here.
A comment section is conspicuously missing from your movie reviews. Have you ever considered allowing feedback and discussion from readers? It might be an interesting experiment...
Ebert: The mind boggles. I have thousands of reviews online. Each comment would have to be vetted by a human being.
When your archives were added to the Suntimes website, what, 15 years ago? I absorbed nearly every review you wrote. I found that I was a decent writer and sometime in high school, I decided I wanted to be a film critic on the side of my surefire art career. Neither happened. The film review career began drying up after I graduated high school. I pursued writing in college instead of art and got my English degree in May of 2008, when everyone lost their jobs.
I was lucky to land any job whatsoever. I did, and it was fine. As time went on, and I became more valued, a writing position was created for me. So now, I am paid to write articles. Not over a subject that I am wholeheartedly passionate about, but at least something interesting and, in my opinion, important.
It was not enough. Not only did I still want to draw, I still wanted to write movie reviews and commentary and theorize about important things.
Once you posted the 'Blogs of my Blog,' I found a wealth of delicious writing on the internet. I started a blog around that time, or shortly thereafter, inspired by the fantastic non-professional-writers, but not knowing what to focus on. I didn't know what "theme" my blog should have. The "theme" eventually snuck up on me. My girlfriend and I have been talking about marriage, kids, houses...da woiks. It struck me that if I have kids, I will need to give them direction and guidance. I will need to teach them about the world and life. I decided to write about things I want my children to know. I want them to know about their father and what is important to me now. When they grow older and ask what type of young man I was, I can show them, whether, by that point, I've forgotten or not (like Krapp). In my view, my blog (that I'm not paid for) is the most important thing that I'm doing.
(BTW: I love when you post this type of thing. I get to peruse the comments and click on everyone's blogs. Thanks to your blog and all of the commenters, for the past two years I've read some great blogs. I even subscribe to a few. I've independently found some of the people you recommended via photo, but I had not found "Movie Mom" before, and she is excellent. I've RSS'd her.)
I love this entry.
I spent all of my college years and many of the years that followed fretting about what I was going to do for a living. I entered college as a mass media major and ended up taking newswriting courses because I thought that would give me a good shot at getting a job out of college. I was right, but ended up miserable. I hate newswriting. How I wish I could go back and study American literature, which is something I've discovered I love.
Thankfully, I'm NOT writing news today, but features for a newspaper (including a weekly movie review column) and stories for video games.
Which brings up an interesting question: Are video game stories literature?
HA! I couldn't resist.
Don't forget the doctor/poet William Carlos Williams!
And the insurance agent/composer Charles Ives!
I know, I know: The list goes on....
Roger,
Here you write "I am obviously approaching the end of my own career. April 1 was my 42nd anniversary at the Chicago Sun-Times. I wouldn't bet on either one of us making it to 50." I hope this isn't some premonitory warning about your ability to continue writing. I think the majority of us here would hope you could continue to 50 (and even 100).
I've been reading this site for several years now and appreciate the passion you've put into your writing. Thank you for continuing it when you could have easily retired for good. I hope to read more for years to come.
P.S. I've enjoyed the links to the other blogs and websites from this post!
Dear Mr. Ebert,
I want to begin this comment by expressing my shear joy in that it is possible you may actually read my silly little school boy gushings. I am a senior in high school and I had been planning a career in professional cinematic journalism for years, that is, until I read this latest blog of yours. It was positively enlightening. I initially set my sights on a career in analyzing and really just appreciating film because it was the extent of my artistic interest at the time and I suppose I clung to it so tightly I overlooked the many possibilities that my life holds. Since then (the age of about 12 is when I caught what Ingmar Bergman referred to as "The Fever") I have been introduced to a myriad of creative outlets that have captivated my imagination in a way that I had for so long believed was exclusive to the cinema. Whether in or out of the classroom I found solace from my mundane routine of a life in the words of William Burroughs, the music of Terry Riley or even the surreal paintings of Jack Kevorkian, but I never gave serious thought to their inclusion in my formal education.
I don't mean to sound giddy, but it is a sincere honor to be communicating with such a hero of mine (I began watching At the Movies before I began watching movies) and I thought I'd take time out of my infinitely busy schedule to let you in on the profundity of your influence on this hopeful microbe of the vast cybernetic landscape of which you speak. I'm off to watch Kar-Wai's Fallen Angels, farewell and godspeed Mr. Ebert.
Exuberantly,
Drew Boggemes
@ Grace Wang:
"Labels are unimportant. Choices are good. A sound judgment is invaluable."
A nice piece of convoluted nonsense. Haha. I guess one need not go to your blog for any good criticism.
A Comment in Two Parts:
Part 1: The advice being given to these younger, aspiring writers and critics echoes the lines spoken by the character Alfredo in "Cinema Paradiso." He grabs a young Toto by the collar and says to him, "Whatever you end up doing, love it. The way you loved the projection booth when you were a little squirt." What's missing from that line is what you write at the end of your blog, Mr. Ebert, "Find out all that you can and see what you can do with it." The joy shouldn't only be in the finding, but in the looking.
For me, it seems that, as I get closer to 40, finding something that you love isn't going to be an event. In fact, if that "love" is going to last, that it should grow from something that you like. I don't love my wife the same way I did when I met her. I liked her then, I love her truly and deeply now. I grew. We grew. Our relationship grew. So, too, should a life's work grow.
But, there I go, rambling again. ;-)
Part 2: I touched on the subject of writing in my own blog about four years ago, though not as elegantly as you, Mr. Ebert, and others have. I started the blog with the full intent of strengthening my writing muscles, but, to paraphrase Lennon, life is what happened to me when I was busy making other plans. I've copied part of the blog entry and I'll post it here. If anyone's interested in reading the rest of the blog, you can go to wholelottanada.blogspot.com.
"SO WHY DO IT?
For the same reasons, I'm sure, a lot of bloggers do it: to have fun and stretch the creative muscles a bit.
There's also a bit of arrogance involved, and don't you deny it. Why would you blog (or keep a diary/ journal or write stories) if you didn't think the tale you had to tell was worth the telling? If you're one of those types that claim, "I write for the sake of artistic expression! It's art for art's sake!" then I have to say that I don't believe you. If you take hours, days, months or years to craft a story or essay or poem and then spend your spare time getting off on your genius, then there's phrase for what you're doing: mental masturbation. I believe that most people write because they WANT their work to be read by others. This desire may be covert or overt, but it's there.
Let's get right to it, shall we? I believe that the three aims of a writer are to entertain, inform and enlighten. If you're a genius -- a Shakespeare, a Faulkner, a Hemingway -- then you'll consistently hit all three aims and you leave a legacy that will have you remembered long after you're dead. If you're good, you'll hit some but not all. An average writer will hit at least one of these aims and a bad writer won't hit any."
Thanks for the time, Mr. Ebert. I may not agree with you on some things, but I do respect your talent as a writer and enjoy reading your blog. I hope my comments were "worth your time."
Thank you for this little aside Mr. Ebert. I have been admiring films since I was 16, critiquing them to the annoyance of some and to the delight of others. Right now I am a law student, just finishing up my first year. My real hope and dream is to one day enter the film industry as a producer. But to be a producer, I was told by someone, that I needed to have a good eye for great films. So I continue to post on my blog (which I have been keeping for a year and a half now) on developments in film adaptations of literature, comic books, and video games. While I know I can't make any money doing this, I just get a fun little satisfaction that someone took time out of their busy schedule to read my blog post and comment on them. Unlike you, I don't moderate them, so I have some pretty outlandish, but no less entertaining remarks :).
But I just want to thank you for encouraging people to find some way to reconcile their future with film in some capacity. Be it starting to critique film or to work in the industry itself, it doesn't matter. Pursuing your love is more important. So thank you for showing everyone how to pursue a love for 42, (here's to a few more).
Wow.
I so enjoyed reading this.
You were always my "reliable" film critic -- the one thumb I could count on. Reading this entry helps me to understand why. Passion for film and passion for passion for film. Great combo, especially in one whose nose refuses to tilt skyward.
As to 50 years -- Hey, it couldn't hurt to try.
First of all, Roger, congratulations on your Webby. It's well-deserved.
The Web has been wonderfully liberating for us writers. I won't even pretend to be anything but a talented amateur in the field of artistic blogging, but it's one which inspires passionate writing from me. I'm driven to share my love of great films--and books and recordings and all great artistic works--in my blog. I've also been fortunate enough to be able to create and share fiction which otherwise would have gone unwritten.
Sadly, the writing site which inspired me to do all of this has decided over the years that it's more important to concentrate on social networking, which means more and more people discussing less and less until finally everyone is avidly talking about nothing. I've never been nearly as good at socializing as I am at writing, so my blog will eventually find a new home elsewhere. But many thanks to you for helping inspire me to share my love of art, in my own small way, with others who share my passion.
Excellent review Roger. I have alot of fun blogging but there's always that discouraging feeling of mouthing off in an echo chamber.
I'd point out three writers if I could:
http://misterneil.blogspot.com/ : Agitation Of The Mind. A British blog that writes about highbrow and lowbrow films with equal elegance.
http://thelongvoyagehome.blogspot.com/: The Long Voyage Home. This is a relatively new blog. So it doesn't have the reputation of a Serigo Leone And The Infield Fly Rule, or The Kind Of Face You Hate yet. But for my money Doniphon is just as good as either. He's really written some top notch stuff, and manages to hit that sweet spot of being academic without seeming like vapid chin stroking.
outlawvern.com: And of course the Outlaw Vern, whose wild vernacular based prose is maybe pound for pound the most enjoyable read out there.
I have my own small blog (http://thingthatdontsuck.blogspot.com/) hope you'll forgive the plug, that I've found to be a satisfying endeavor.
If my expirience means anything, the one piece of advice I'd give to people just starting out is ignore the daily results as best you can. Write a 1,500 word piece about a film you desperately love? Be glad if 50 people read it. Post a funny video that can be found a dozen other places on line? The skies the limit!!!
The stat that matters is the monthly totals and how they stack up. Simply are there more people on this month then last month? And ever since I've started blogging more days then not, the answer has been yes.
For all the talk about how blogging has dumbed down film criticism I think it's made it more Darwinian, since it takes access out of the question, it becomes a matter of purely whose the most effective writer. If you write like Dennis Cozzalio, Kim Morgan, or Stacie Ponder, people will read you. If you don't they won't.
But simply put if you're lucky enough to have a small pool of people who will read what you write (I had a good base in a few internet forums where I had been posting long enough to not be accused of merely spamming. Blogothons to, participate in any that will have you. They are the new bloggers friends because most of the time the people writing them are desperate for content.) and you keep writing, they will recommend it to people and post links, and the people who read those etc. Slowly but surely your audience will grow.
Anyway this grew more ranty then I intended. But suffice to say, thanks for posting this article. And I can only offer my thoughts and prayers that you and the Sun both make it well past 50.
One of the wonderful things about the online world is that film criticism and advocacy are no longer limited to writing or the small number of broadcast media programs devoted to entertainment. My absolute favorite film reviewer (aside from Roger, of course) is Steve Hayes, whose Tired Old Queen At The Movies are simply fabulous.
Steve is as stage actor in New York and has had a few small film parts, most memorably in Trick, where he plays the older gay friend with the occupied apartment.
These video commentaries bring a camp sensibility to a celebration of classic movies. Steve sprinkle's his reviews with insightful gems passion from film history and radiates joy while sharing his passion for the classics. A great place to start is his review of Black Narcissus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZHaAuM_Uwk
If you enjoy old movies, you'll enjoy Tired Old Queen At The Movies.
There are many great blogs on the internet but only so much time. I enjoy reading a mixture of amateur blogs and professional ones like yours on a variety of subjects such as programming, games and movies. And indeed, the "amateur" ones are sometimes as good as the professional ones.
Name any topic and someone will have a blog about it. I enjoy playing the game World of Warcraft and I have discovered that there's an entire "blogosphere" around the game. And those blogs are even divided in niche blogs who only deal with a very specific subset of the game. It's always interesting to see who writes them. I've been following a blog written by a German engineer, a Swedish reporter and one by an American programmer for over a year. Both of the non native writers have a remarkably good English knowledge. The engineer is writing one full A4 paper on average every day... for seven years. What does he get from it? Nothing material except about forty comments a day. He obviously does it because he enjoys writing and that should be the main reason to start a blog.
So I agree with your advice, if someone wants to become a professional writer let them start with a blog. What it's about isn't even the most important part, it has to be well written. If they're great they will be noticed. Even though 90% of every site on the internet is crap I've discovered that the other 10% always floats to the top.
Donald Miller: "videos" ??
That was supposed to be "video games"
Don't you just hate it when that happens?
Just how many awards are there? Three-quarters of film-people's time must be spent giving and receiving awards. I'm in the Woody Allen camp on that one. Peter O'Toole feels somehow diminished because he's an "Eight time loser." That' what he said on The Charlie Rose Show. When I think of Peter O' Toole, the last word that comes to mind is loser.
Boozer, yes. Loser, no.
As Rob (John Cusack) said in "High Fidelity":
"She reviews movies for a living, which is unassailably cool."
The full quote, this time:
"She reviews movies for a living, which is unassailably cool, even if she does make these little notes with this little flashlight pen."
I've decided to give criticism a go. And why not? I've wanted to since I was just a kid, but it never occurred to me until recently that I could do it online and not get paid for it. Hopefully I'll have something to offer, but mainly I'm doing it so I'll become a better viewer.
My wish is that one day I'll again be able to see a great film in a theater with a hundred or so strangers, immersed in the experience. After my last few experiences, I'm not holding my breath.
I'm just getting into films so I love reading blogs and reviews from various sites including IMDB. There are a few people over at IMDB that have over 5000 reviews; everything from recent films, to Golden Age classic and even stuff from the 1890s. A couple guys like planktonrules and Michael Elliot have thousands of reviews. I've e-mailed them and they both share a love of all sorts of movies and I must say that their passion make me want to see more and learn more. One likes to do longer reviews while the other prefer capsule reviews. I enjoy going to their pages each day to see what else they've watched and the majority of the time it's something I've never heard of but add to my list of things to search out. Each new blog I visit just introduces me to new movies which is the greatest thing about this new world.
Roger saying his career is nearing its end doesn't bother me a bit. When you're an old codger -- and he has been codging longer than I -- "near" has a tolerance of 25 years, give or take. My grandpa once drove from Toledo to Cleveland on the Ohio Turnpike (speed limit 75) at 15 m.p.h. He refused to let my mother drive. "When you get to be my age," he said, "you realize there's no hurry about anything." It's hard to say whether the traffic backed up about 30 miles agreed at that time, but they all did get older. Not long afterward several states posted minimum speed limits on their highways.
There ya go, Randy: now, sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. A high contribution the 'net has made is, you can kill your opponent fair and square dead in full satisfaction, and since he can get up to fight another day without a problem, it's a less messy or guilt-ridden affair than the old fashioned way of "rectifying national boundaries with a cannon." We all might be preventing World War Three, or at least, softening it up some.
...or, you know, those Tea-partiers aren't kidding, and lots and lots of them don't insult themselves with Fox News. (Just today I opened an old e-mail box that still has 926 yet-to-read e-mails from a discussion about it 4 years back. They were people with very high simmering IQs.)
But the word-war still must be fair and square. Ignoring one's opponent's parries and thrusts right through the holes in one's reasoning isn't fair and square, and could evenutally require the old-fashioned method. I think that's what a moderator need be for, not a Miss Grundy of sanitary discussion.
Here is a thought-problem: why do people think that money legitimizes them as writers? Not even Matthew, Mark, Luke or John made a nickel at it. Yet the bible altogether remains the biggest all time seller in history that few actually read.
Here's a link to a great, insightful blogger (a friend) who covers film and theatre (and more) in San Francisco.
http://myculturallandscape.blogspot.com/
Hope you enjoy it,
Yes, but this doesn't necessarily have to be burdensome or expensive. This blog post, and the consistently high quality of your comments section, demonstrates that there are plenty of people among your regular readers who could do a good job of vetting comments. Assuming that some people here are willing to volunteer to vet comments, the work could be crowdsourced. The only thing that you or your staff would have to do is manage the system for delegating that power to the right people.
This sort of thing is done pretty routinely on websites like the Daily Kos or Wikipedia, both of which encourage people not only to vet content but to contribute content themselves. To this day, Wikipedia doesn't have a single paid editor. All content creation and editing is done by volunteers. I don't think the Daily Kos has a very large staff either. Setting something like this up is not difficult from a technical perspective.
Hi Paul J. Marasa,
Someone asked me at EbertFest if you were there. I was pretty sure that you were, and was regretting not getting to meet you there. I would have liked discussing film with you there.
Oh well. Some other time, I hope.
This has nothing to do with your post, which I enjoyed reading, but I feel like I had to tell someone, like yelling at the top of a mountain. My brother and I just tore apart a few hipsters on an argument that we had no intention of taking seriously. They got really offended and took everything we said seriously and remained in denial that they are hipsters. We laughed. Like I said, I had to tell someone. Yea.
Mr. Ebert,
I read your blog occasionally and I found this blog entry to be particularly inspiring and touching, and felt the need to reply and thank you.
As a university student who's majoring in English, the advice you provide here (from both yourself and what you quoted from David Bordwell), as well as your thoughtfulness on this subject, is something I greatly appreciate. For an aspiring writer with, I admit, little motivation and a great deal of pessimism (I guess I sort of see myself in the same vein as the student you mention here, searching for advice), it is a blog post like this, that I believe can inspire at least some sense of hope amongst students like myself. It feels as though you were speaking to individuals like myself almost directly.
I, personally, do not have a blog and never saw any use for one. But now, I sort of feel the need to get one. The internet is a great vehicle to express thought, and it is one that I have not yet utilized.
I also think it was very admirable and even touching for you to include those photographs. It is little touches like this that often enhance your blog entries in a very positive way.
I strongly look forward to reading more of these entries from you, as well as your film reviews of course.
Thank you Mr. Ebert, for sharing this.
Lovely article, Roger. I started gaining a real passion for movies when I was about 14 (I can even pinpoint the movie that did it for me -- The Talented Mr Ripley), and eventually gained an honours degree in Film Studies from the Australian National University.
I know that the movies are going to be a big part of my life, and my passion for them has been fuelled in no small part by you. Along with a few other writers (alive and dead), you're the reason I write. In the last three years, I've seen my little blog grow from a hackish (and I can admit as much) self-subsistent project to something that's earned me interviews with Palm D'Or winners and famed comedians. It's even received a comment from you :)
Thanks for acknowledging that 'the bloggers' aren't all poisoning the well of intelligent film criticism.
Roger,
Reading these comments, I found that many people had the same response that I did: invigoration. I wonder how many blogs will be started or restarted because of your post.
There has been a lot of writing about the "death of film criticism" lately, and you said everything that those articles have said, about how it's impossible to make money as a critic, about how some of the A-list critics are losing their jobs. After reading those articles, I was depressed. Now, after reading your post, I want to write more than ever.
Your post opened my eyes to the fact that there are a lot of people just like me out there, who write film blogs in their spare time because it's something that makes them immeasurably happy. I never took the time to investigate these fellow amateur writers, but now I have, and I'm tremendously excited to keep exploring their work. I'm very thankful for that newfound sense of community.
The internet is such an amazing thing. To think, YouTube was only founded in 2005, around the same time that Wikipedia started to become more popular. And now the internet has allowed me to directly communicate with one of my heroes.
Thank you Roger, for everything you've ever written and will write.
Sincerely,
Cade Harstedt
I used to be one of the very few movie reviewers (I hesitate to call myself a critic) who actually got paid for doing it. Not much. Barely anything, in fact. It was just a monthly 150-175 word blurb in our local paper that I wrote for $25 plus the cost of my movie ticket. But there's something immensely satisfying about getting paid to do something you love, whether it's writing, singing (I do that too), or anything else you would happily do for free.
Sadly, I had to stop writing the column when I signed up as a candidate for Town Council this year. 'Unfair advantage' and all that. Funny thing is, I miss it. I can still write reviews for my blog, but somehow it just isn't the same as seeing your work in print.
The thing that always gets me is the way old fogies like to rant about the internet because "anyone" can publish content there. They reason that outmoded stereotypes are adequate cause for dismissing anything written by an amateur author. Wikipedia gets the most flak, because anyone can edit it. If they bothered to look at Wikipedia at all, they would find it was filled with detailed, informative, well-written articles on an enormous number of subjects. Just because any idiot can make edits doesn't mean that any idiot will, and besides, the community goes a long way to keep the articles correct and free of vandalism. But a lot of stubborn old farts refuse to give validity to personal websites and blogs simply because there are no major corporations regulating the content. I've seen a number of people railing against amateur movie critics, and I've probably seen most of those people when either you or Jim has taken them to task for their blatant ignorance. Just because you can find worthless goon comments in, for example, many comment sections at Rotten Tomatoes, is no excuse to deny the existence of all the literate, intelligent, insightful bloggers that you and I know exist.
Hi Roger,
I offer praise, and an idea, in a form more theatrical than concise. Here it is:
When I began reading you as a teenager I wanted to know what a kindred spirit thought about this or that movie; now, more and more, I want to know what this kindred spirit, of superior years and wisdom, thinks about life and everything else under the sun.
I appreciate all of your thoughts, especially recently, on information technology, video games, and everything else that fits the geological category of 'recent events'. I am no Luddite, but I do have an anachronistic sense of nostalgia (and oddly enough I've always gotten on well with the elderly, which has not exactly attracted the babes). So my computer screen twinkled when I read about the sound of the presses starting with a thundering roar, as you fondly recall. This is because I can imagine you remembering this. I knowingly nod without knowing for this nostalgia is once removed. Yet we can all relate to changes by treasuring the memories of what the present has been changed from. Outside of the particulars, nostalgia is universal. I think we are on the cusp of a major step, and I acknowledge the present as a major source of future nostalgia. It's been good so far, so what's next?
Your words on becoming a critic are sage and I think we need more - and varied - critics. When I read this post, and considered the Internet, idealistic college days came to mind. Those days a hangover was cured by two cups of coffee, a prolonged breakfast, and a room littered with newspapers that would reluctantly be recycled only once their volume became absurd. One day, over those newspapers, a conversation about McLuhan's "the medium is the message" prognosticated deep into the future (about our current year, revealing our grasp of 'depth' at the time). Far from the mark we were, for what a remarkable era of entwined media and message it has turned out to be!
But to return to those days, McLuhan being much too local to be meaningful, at the time my friends and I were much more enamoured with an exotic fellow named Guy Debord, a Marxist who posited that the media alienates people with shocking images, these images owned and thumbed and fingered like a common prostitute: another capitalist spectacle distracting us from real relationships! These ideas may well return in several decades, another slow sub-conscious tide, the eternal reoccurrence of the same...
But for now I return to McLuhan. What does this medium mean to us, the Internet? Meaningfully it has changed the world or film criticism. Less apparently meaningfully I think about my existential self. Why is it that I am mesmerized so by so many comments? Connected, yes, yet alienated? I lose time to the errant thoughts and prejudices of people I will never meet. They might as well be orbiting Jupiter. Yet I allow my mood to shift and I may have to skip breakfast and face another hungry day of labour as another comment, contrary to my beliefs concerning AGW, festers first on screen and then in my mind.
Their grammar mistakes mistake me for a misanthrope! I hate trollers, yet read whatever they say! Sometimes, discouraged, I post satire. I check to see how others respond. Foolishly I feel arrogant when an otherwise intelligent poster responds to chastise me - someone with the same heart and feelings - alas! they didn't get the satire and, connected as we are, I set myself up for sweet self-pity as a chose wily-nily what is satire at my own convenience. Dover Beach all over again, two hearts will never beat as one, and all of that jazz, played all to my lonesome in the deafening crowd. I no longer worry about getting lost in my own austere thoughts as the entangled thoughts of the world enfold and ensnare. In dreams I return to threads where I am unstuck, reconciled... free.
The online comments you host have been highly regarded; maybe it is time for some of us comment posters to become real meta-critics. Critics of the Internet as a medium, as McLuhan would suggest, and of the self-forming communities of user-generated comment threads. Memes and art, side-by-side, may be analysed and criticized, while motives transparent and opaque may be realized . As long as we don't abandon our critical faculties we can remain masters of our fate. Critics, onward, en masse! For what we have here is an unprecedented mortor, electrified, awaiting the spirit of humanity to crush its own self.
As someone who loves anime and loves writing even more, contributing reviews to an anime website was a natural step. When I read this blog entry, I felt somehow rewarded for something I thought was just a silly hobby. Not that I think myself an outstanding writer (yet!) but I can't get enough of penning my thoughts on shows I watch. I'm also addicted to that sense of improving with every review. Thank you very much, Mr Ebert, for recognising the passions of lesser-known bloggers and reviewers from all around the globe. The existence of such diverse, well-formulated opinions can only benefit us all.
Now to bookmark this page so I can discover those writers you highlighted...
I love writing, which is odd to say because these last few years have been strange. My output has dropped to nothing and I often prefer listening and reading to talking or writing. I've changed a lot inside, resolving a lot of issues, exorcising a lot of demons, and lost a lot of the toxic things that once made me want to write. Though I have been slowly "relearning" to write for my own pleasure, as opposed to writing for some ego trip or out of some moronic obsessive compulsive need to argue. I also think others genuinely like my writing as well and would think it was a waste if I took a vow of literary silence.
Personally, I wouldn't reccomend that anyone study art directly. There's really no point. Can you study how to be in love? If you have a passion it will find you, and if you genuinely love it back you will find a way to express it.
Also, most art is inexpensive to produce anyway. A writer needs MS word, a painter needs a canvas and some paint supplies, a scultor a big rock and some tools, a musician needs an instrument and sound recording software, a photographer needs a camera and image editing software. If you want it, you'll find a way.
The only artform I would reccomend that someone go to school to learn is filmmaking. It's too complex and expensive to risk working for free in film. So I reccomened that the budding director/actor/producer study accounting and economics. Trust me, if you're succesful you'll need it and if you aren't it's a great way to pay the bills.
I've been lucky in my life to have gotten as far as I have without much school. I have a semi-decent paying job that gives me a lot of free time, which is worth it's weight in gold. However, one of the great shames in my life is that I quit high-school in 8th grade. The result of the wonderful education system in Quebec (some schools have an 80% dropout rate) is that I can barely write in my native French language and master the English one pretty damn good considering I learned most of it by ear, reading books.
If I had a kid I'd be like your dad Roger. I wouldn't even want them to know what I do for a day job, even though it's great fun work. I'd want them to go to college and university and learn something useful, telling them: "Art will always find you, but money won't."
I always enjoy your ability to find the silver --or in this case gold-- lining in these situations. Too often, the professionals in the media look down on bloggers, but in the end, they represent the best of literary and democratic traditions.
These new men (and women) of lettters could be cranks, or weirdos, or eccentric, but so long as they write about their passions, there's always an invigorating sense of passion. I now follow a blog about a man who plays competitive Monopoly, and a woman who enjoys dissecting Kissinger tracts on diplomacy. It's like being a delightfully quirky buffet where the line is never full and where the fare is always varied.
The internet is a redux of the Gutenberg Revolution a thousand times over. As a high school student, I know that these online connections can be prosaic, but the very act of connecting is important.
The sooner we realize that, the sooner we will --to borrow from Tim Leary-- tune in. That's what's needed in this age.
I don't want to be a party pooper, but there seem to be an awful lot of "writers" on here who don't bother to read their posts before sending them. Like the English professor who writes, "... it does me a great deal of good to hear you giving students this kind of advice to students...."
Huh?
I think we need a few less writers and a few more editors. But that's just my opinion.
brian, there are two posts that seem to serve that function for commenting on reviews: "Your Movie Sucks" and "Recent Two Thumbs Up". That sort of excludes the movies that land in the middle, but such movies don't typically warrant much discussion anyway.
The spam filter must have eaten a comment of mine from May 1st. Perhaps there were too many links in it?
First, I'm glad you mentioned David Bordwell above. I have now bookmarked his blog and plan to seek out his books.
Second, I had a blog in which I wrote my own reactions to film. I suppose it could be classified as criticism, though I was actually inspired by your Great Movies writing rather than your weekly reviews. I wrote only about films that I felt positively about. In any case, I think 3 people read my blog so I gradually paid less attention to it.
I am glad for your blog and the Ebert Club as learning about and enjoying film is one of the great pleasures of my life. Congratulations on your Webby!
Interesting blog, Roger.
I used to write film reviews for my college newspaper, and I think they were pretty good. Once I graduated and moved on to other work I stopped, but I always enjoyed writing about movies and watching them, and I've thought about getting back into it once I finish up my graduate degree.
I like the idea of blog writing, because these days I'm not as interested in writing as if I were writing for a newspaper, where I'd have to describe plot points, have a set word count, etc. I'm much more interested in the analytical end of film criticism, and blogs are perfect for that.
Heck, it wouldn't be a paid gig, but it never was for me. I loved it regardless.
Great blog as always.
Roger,
I really respect you for seeing the diversity the Internet has brought to the expression of ideas, opinions and discussion about all things, including film criticism. The increase of communication between those who truly appreciate cinema and can bring interesting viewpoints to it is very refreshing and, at times, illuminating.
However, it is in my nature to be somewhat anxious about it and unready to call it a "golden age." There are many cinephiles debating and critiquing quality films around the world thanks to this digital revolution. Yet, there are many more who tear down artists and films they may not understand or may not wish to. There can be thoughtful discussion in the right areas (your blogs are an amazing spot for this). But many more comment sections, like those on IMDB, become grounds for petty bickering and fan idolization of certain films. You clearly know this as you seem to brace for backlash with every review of a comic book or Twilight film you prepare.
But the benefits of this do outweigh the negativities. Unfortunately, there has yet to be a clear way to sift through the phatic communication on the Internet. The phatic comm. boils down to people mostly saying "I'm here, look at me!" and screaming that into the void. It is less about expression or dialogue and usually more simply reiterating one's existence for attention or otherwise. It becomes hard to find the interesting voices with something unique to say with seemingly hundreds of bloggers just raving about Transformer movies.
I suppose this is my cynical side, but I do not think we will have reached the golden age until Internet film criticism can reach the heights of nuance (in a far less elitist and exclusive medium) that it did in print media in the 20th century with the writings of critics like Pauline Kael and yourself.
Oh--and it is too bad it is nearly impossible to make a living off it today. Otherwise, I'd be trying to right now.
Always,
A Fan
Well hey, wow, speaking of not getting paid for writing. Google "Simeon Toko" like I just did. Never mind that little blonde twerp "channeling." She read my publicity article and made all that silly stuff up.
Whole buncha links, all thanks to yours truly here, from an editing project 10 years ago. How time flies. Welp, they stiffed me for about $1700, I think it was, plus a good deal more for efforts above and beyond the call of duty. Anyhow the publisher went to jail. Haven't heard from them since. The article paid only $200 and went worldwide, translated into a buncha languages. I've got a copy of it in a very glossy Greek magazine.
Simeon Toko made for a real interesting topic on the "Why are there Messiahs?" panel at the 62nd Annual Conference on World Affairs, for which our dear Roger recommended me. Google "62nd Annual Conference on World Affairs," too.
Without old Uncle-of-Mankind Toko to talk about, the panel would've been a bunch of re-hashed jokes about scary new Jesuses and a few horror stories. Julia Sweeney really was funny, tho'.
One horror story worth repeating: Sun Myung Moon DID have himself crowned King of the Universe in a session of our own god damned SENATE a few years back. How come Chip Berlet and I are yet the only ones to even know that? You people need to understand just how crazy your Congress lately is.
As Simeon Toko himself once joked, "I am crazy, you are crazy, but everyone else is even crazier." I think that needs to be a meme, don't you, Roger? So I'll repeat it often.
Object lesson: you writers who just have to write, write a lot. You who think it's a clever way to make money, go away and stop bothering me. 'cuz when you have to write, the adventures can be well worth it.
Oh. Yeh. And I just last night came across and AMAZING, life-changing YouTube presentation. You will be mesmerized. It's in four parts, so be sure to snap out of your trances to click on the next ones:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd9mTU-9tFw&feature=related
You have very good points, when viewed from a cheerful perspective. And I cherish a cheerful perspective, and on my best days I can actually work one up myself. But I can't help wondering whether you and the EbertBlog (and its followers) live in a kind of bubble that doesn't really represent the "blogosphere" in general; what you gain in genuine passion and variety of opinions, you lose in craft and informed opinion. And, while its true that your blog gets the most uncommonly literate and thoughtful responses, it's also true that 30 seconds scanning the comments page on Aint It Cool News (certainly the center of the internet film universe) gets my blood boiling every time: racism, AWFUL and violent sexism, an absolute disinclination to rise to the challenge a difficult film offers... unimaginative dunderheads urinating with their keyboards. (A recent satirical piece from The Onion suggested that Iron Man 2 was getting major buzz from fanboys because there of a scene where Gwyneth Paltrow gets punched by Iron Man... this was then reflected by real actual enthusiastic responses from the AICN trolls, who seemed one-and-all to think that seeing Gwnyeth Paltrow - a lovely, graceful, charming actress who, as far as I know, never did anything to anyone - beaten by a metal fist was indeed a sexually arousing possibility. This has more to do with the state of young American males than it does with anything resembling film criticism, of course...)
I love writing, and I am on my knees before the God of Film (I call him John Ford this week) for life. But, sadly, I have a blog that I've posted about three things on in four years. Your piece, however, encourages me to start writing film essays for posting there - which is to say, your piece gives me hope that such an endeavor isn't just (to bring up urine again) pissing in the wind. And "pissing in the wind" is how I sometimes feel about writing when I consider my own personal opinion and then imagine how uninterested the current culture might be in all of it... but that's my own cynicism creeping in, and god knows I don't need that, and god knows it has no value. None, right?
I want to boldly write a piece about how I think John Carpenter is the most underrated American filmmaker (if Andre de Toth can be fully and rightfully acclaimed at this point, so can John Carpenter) and how he really illustrates what the auteur theory was all about in the first place. And when I read you and the above, I feel like such an endeavor would be quite righteous. But when I take a look around the rest of the world, I remember that most people would trade their brains for a better car if they could.
I like to think I deal in "soulful misanthropy"... ;)
Ebert: Most people would be wrong.
Such an inspiring blog Roger. And I'd read your hero's words a few weeks back on one of Jim Emerson's blogs and that rang as true then as they do seeing you quote them here.
I've been writing about movies since 1996, when I started getting mini-reviews published in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's "You Be the Critic" section. From there, I continued to write about movies frequently (even if it was just for myself), and finally started a email list for my reviews for friends and family in 1999, which eventually grew into Sonic Cinema, my website.
I majored in Music Industry/Sound Recording in college, but always wanted to pursue a path into film music. It was in those years that my film writing became a regular thing, and I began to emmerse myself into cinema, an exploration I'm still in the middle of. Deep down, I never was meant for the music industry- I just didn't want to work in a studio for a living, but that pursuit wasn't in vein. In addition to continuing to record my own compositions, in 2003 some friends and I began recording our own commentaries for movies inspired by an article of yours, a practice we still maintain today.
Sonic Cinema doesn't keep me afloat financially, nor does my music (my real job is as a booth manager at one of our bigger soul-sucking theatre chains :) ), but it's my own little slice of the 'net, and a labor of love to maintain. I've had a lot of people over the years say I should go pro as a critic, but I've generally shrugged off such talk simply because, well, I love the freedom of blogging. No deadlines, no restrictions, no rules save one- I have to have something I want to talk about. Whether that means a concert I went to, an album I listened to, a film I saw, a film score I composed, or a film I'm working on.
Thank you for the inspiration along the way Roger.
All the talk of varied qualifications and interests reminds me of what I've heard (do correct me if I'm wrong) about working critics: very few of them set out for careers in criticism. It almost seems a prerequisite.
I (for whatever it might be worth) kind of fell into the world of online criticism. I was asked to write festival catalog reviews, and enjoyed the work. One thing led to another, and I secured a section on a film site. I'm a musician, my education is in production, and my free time consists of creating and appreciating as many art forms as I can find. I'm a writer first, and have been since before I can remember.
One of the things that I hear quite often (particularly at the panels in London) is that the world seems to think online and 'traditional' journalism are two entirely different things. Exclusively online criticism seems to be thought of as existing only for small, select audiences. Some otherwise responsible people make absurd generalizations about quality differences.
I'm unsure as to whether online is an end in itself, considering the limited economic prospects of the Internet. For me, it's mostly an opportunity to showcase writing ability, which may lead to other types of professional writing (as Jeff Shannon alluded to), most likely contributions to books. I'd love to write regularly for a publication, but certainly don't assume this is a prospect.
I'm immensely appreciative of your considered perspective (as always), and of the many written beneath it. If ever you have an opportunity to look at my writing, I'd love to hear what you think.
Hi Roger.
Film criticism is, for me, a dream out of reach, and what made it "frustratingly" frustrating is your heartbreaking advice. I think I'm going nowhere.
No Platonic sermon would change the fact that I'm deeply disillusioned.
"The horror, the horror" of voices muted by the demons of luck.
Thank you for opening my closed doors.
The comments on this blog have inspired me so!
I have been writing about film now for roughly six months. I created a website that was dedicated to exploring films that I thought were great. I took the majority of my inspiration from your "Great Movies" series.
I cannot say that I am the most articulate writer out there, nor can I say that I am as intelligent about the craft of filmmaking as some of my fellow bloggers commenting on this site. What I do see, however, is a shared experience. I have found that writing about film (particularly in the kind of immersive way I am trying to) really makes me appreciate the pictures I am exploring on a whole other level. I find that when I am done writing my 1500 or so words I realize something new and different about myself.
I have friends that ask why I write about the movies. I am sure some feel that I am strange for spending so much time on something that I am not getting paid for. My answer to them is simple. I write about movies because I care about you. I find myself wanting to share the great experiences and emotions that I get from watching a great movie, whether it be "Ikiru" or "Where the Wild Things Are."
I find myself getting different looks from the peers that have read my writing. I like it.
Thank you so much for your impact on my life.
Ebert: Funny. I think Spanish and all the Legtin tongues are erotic.
I believe that the correct word is latin.
Ebert:
The value of a liberal arts education is priceless. Having that type of background makes one a more versatile person and can help in any career path a person chooses.
__a mass comm/history dual degree recipient working in the computer field
i remember back in the day i used to be a big-time critic for the boston herald, hell of a day the day was.
Thanks for posting this, Roger, leave it to you to make that crazy little movie review site I spend so many hour caring and feeding seem like a noble calling. The Internet is actually a better venue for long-form movie writing than the print media because of the way it sucks you in to bouncing from one related topic to another. Certainly one could have stacked 50 newspapers and magazines and the library and gone through them all reading thoughts on a movie you'd just seen, but did anyone really do that? Now, upon seeing a great new movie (or even a flawed one that begs for further consideration), you can compare notes with hundreds upon hundreds of people all over the world with the click of a mouse. And not one of them under pressure from an editor to be harder on the movie or talk more about how the actors look. A golden age indeed!
Off topic! Smile.
@ Roger wrote:
Re: Iron Man 2
"Since both movies have essentially the same story arc, there aren't a lot of surprises, however, which started me to wondering how the guys survive inside those suits. Sure, the suits are armored, but their bodies aren't. How many dizzying falls and brutal blows and sneaky explosions can you survive without breaking every bone in your body? Just asking'. At the end of a long day, those suits should be filled with bloody pulp."
How hard would you have to shake an egg in order to scramble the contents inside the shell?
That's what I'm wondering now.
Chuckle!
Either way, I'm glad to hear the film doesn't suck - as the trailer kinda looked like it might; ie: way too many explosions.
The comments on this blog have inspired me so!
I have been writing about film now for roughly six months. I created a website that was dedicated to exploring films that I thought were great. I took the majority of my inspiration from your "Great Movies" series.
I cannot say that I am the most articulate writer out there, nor can I say that I am as intelligent about the craft of filmmaking as some of my fellow bloggers commenting on this site. What I do see, however, is a shared experience. I have found that writing about film (particularly in the kind of immersive way I am trying to) really makes me appreciate the pictures I am exploring on a whole other level. I find that when I am done writing my 1500 or so words I realize something new and different about myself.
I have friends that ask why I write about the movies. I am sure some feel that I am strange for spending so much time on something that I am not getting paid for. My answer to them is simple. I write about movies because I care about you. I find myself wanting to share the great experiences and emotions that I get from watching a great movie, whether it be "Ikiru" or "Where the Wild Things Are."
I find myself getting different looks from the peers that have read my writing. I like it.
Thank you so much for your impact on my life.
I'm technologically illiterate so I don't have my own blog. So I write movie reviews for a friend's blog instead. When somebody leaves a comment, I feel very fulfilled. Whether that person agrees with my review or curses me for giving a bad review for a movie that he loves, I cherish them all. I argue with some of them, but not because I want to shut them up, I want to learn something from the argument.
You receive hundreds, and sometimes, thousands of comments/responses from your blog entries and reviews. How does that make you feel? :)
I'm drunk and this comment is irrelevant to your blog entry, but I'm watching the season premier of "Boondocks" and I'll be damned if it isn't Werner Herzog doing the funniest goddamned self-spoof I've ever seen. PLEASE tell me you've seen this.
Apologies.
Agustín: I believe that the correct word is latin. (not legtin)
Fraudian slip, no doubt. However, it is surprising to discover that after those Russ Meyer movies, Roger is a leg man.
Your entry caused me to reflect on the state of film criticism in India, which has never come close to be taken as seriously as in the West. As a result many critics working for popular publications churn out reviews that are tolerant, indulgent even, of banal, big banner, productions.
I read somewhere (could've been one of your entries) that Pauline Kael had a hard time with her editors for routinely tearing apart big budget productions in her reviews. Yet, where you come from, there is still significant agreement over the need for objectivity & influence in film criticism. This is not yet the case here, which is ironic considering that the quality of Bollywood cinema is steadily rising because of the works of a handful of intelligent & visionary filmmakers.
I share this because I love films & I regret the noticeable gulf in the perception of film criticism in India compared to the West. Your reviews, along with those of Stephen Hunter, Manohla Dargis, J. Hoberman, to name but a few, had an immeasurable role in helping me discover my love for cinema and I think at the end of the day that is one of the principal objective of all forms of criticism.
So while it's heartening to know that the internet has spawned quality writing on films by a legion of bloggers, one would have hoped that this revolution of sorts did not take place in the backdrop of full-time critics losing their jobs.
Thank you for this entry. Like Yancy Berns who left her comment here, I feel encouraged yet again to shed my lack of discipline and return to writing about the films that I love. So help me God.
I made a movie blog today.
Very interesting blog entry. I just want to say to any aspiring film critic out there reading your blog, just hang in there.
I also write a movie review blog. I have for the past two years. And now, finally, things seem to be going my way. I was actually quoted in a movie trailer, "The Girl on the Train", and I'm going to have my first article published in a newspaper as a result.
No, I'm not as famous as Roger Ebert, but, my hope is, one good thing will lead to two and then three...ect.
If you have a passion for writing and movies just keep doing it. People will soon notice.
I am touched by your heartfelt appreciation of online film criticism, mr. Ebert. From 2004 to 2008, I was the founding editor of a website called 24LiesAsecond. It featured "provocative film criticism with an underdog bite" in the form of long-form essays by some amazingly knowledgable movie-loving people I've met on the Internet (now renowned film-blogger Dennis Cozzalio was one of them, as well as established author Robert C. Cumbow). We were an odd little collective coming from completely different backgrounds and spanning all corners of the globe (the Netherlands, in my case), but what we shared was this need for a universal platform to express our passionate ideas on cinema. Soon after we started, the blogosphere exploded and became the ultimate online film criticism platform. 24Lies eventually merged with The House Next Door (now itself part of Slant).
I've never earned a dime with my efforts online, but the World Wide Web can be a hell of an education in itself. A lot of the things I've learned as an amateur editor/critic, I found I could sooner or later put to practical use in my day job as a filmmaker. And as you said above: inspiration works the other way around, too. In a slowly evolving pursuit of more dramatic and visually orientated ways of expressing thoughts on film, I picked up my old fineliner and turned to webcomics and cartoons (one of which you may remember).
What's especially great about the Internet, is this: No matter how microscopic your niche is, there's probably a world-wide audience for it. If you have something worthwhile to say and choose your words wisely, it will be heard (just don't expect to get rich). There's an ocean of knowledge out there and we've only begun to explore the depths of it.
Roger, do you know that James Berardinelli's 'Reelviews' site now has a forum? Stop by sometime! You could even join! We have a 'Great Movies' section devoted entirely to the They Shoot Pictures List.
Reelviews Forum
I started writing about movies because I wanted to talk about them to others. That led me to making my own blog after realizing that it is more comfortable way to handle my reviews along with photo shots from the movies. Plus I could write in URL when I left the comments in your blog, although many people, including you, cannot read Korean.
I once told my advisor professor about Ebertfest and told him my purpose of the visit was finding what I can do in film criticism. Thanks to you and others, I learned a lot from Ebertfest as well as Chicago. I am still not sure about my opinions and still need some feedbacks and more knowledges, but I was happy to know that many people are willing to share some time with me for that. And I realized that I cannot waste what I have learned for 10 years at my campus while observing the University of Illinois. I like flying among movies, but I need the airport(Yeah, I watched "Up in the Air" while flying back to my home).
I will be less active on the Web than before for pulling myself up for continuing my education, but I will keep in my mind Bordwell's valuable advice you mentioned. There are lots of things too good to miss.
And you have been one of excellent windows opened to them. Without you, I would have never thought of reading McCarthy's books other than "No Country for Old Men" and "The Road". In addition, I was introduced to many people and their websites thanks to you.
While I take a step back, I also take one or two steps forward. I will keep watching on others' valuable opinions about films and the informations provided by them. And I start the English blog I've had promised to myself to make. Although I will be less active than before, I will continue to write in my blogs whenever the chance comes. And expressing my thoughts on your blog, too.
P.S.
Last week, I found some funny mistake in some renowned weekly movie magazine from three weeks ago. It had the special articles about the abuse of CGI, and one of them quoted what Gerardo Valero said in "Memo to Spielberg: Hands off "Jaws!"" without missing a word. The punchline is, they wrote that the opinion was written by you, not him. Somebody misunderstood that line: "Uploaded by Roger Ebert". But how the hell did that somebody miss the line below it? "Gerardo Valero, Mexico City".
Yancy: I think you should write that piece about John Carpenter, because I promise you I would not only read it, but forward it to several of my friends who are serious Carpenter fans. Do not get discouraged. Do not get pessimistic. Just WRITE IT! It sounds like you have something to say, so say it.
Dear Mr. Ebert,..
I hope you response thiz letter,..
I'm Jonny Fendi,.. I came from Indonesia,..
I also have a great enthusiasm on movies,..
Yes, I also what you said small-critic below the radar,.. I wrote some critics,.. All of them were published on my personal Blog and sometimes on IMDB,..
Please visit my Blog "JONNY'S MOVEE" on:
http://jonnyfendi.blogspot.com
I need your guidance and commentaries,..
Sincerely Yours,
Jonny Fendi
With all the rhetoric that’s been flying around about the “death of film criticism” these past few years, it’s good to see that you, one of the big-time establishment critics, understand that the popular line isn’t necessarily true. To dismiss the work of unpaid or semi-pro Web-based writers as being amateurish, as many old-liners have done, is rank snobbery. Naturally, as with anything on the Internet, there is a good amount of crap to sift through, but if you know where and how to look for quality, there are also more insightful and cinema-savvy writers out there than ever.
Of course, they’re not making money doing it. Even if newspapers were thriving this would be the case. With so much cinema literacy floating around, there wouldn’t be enough paid gigs even in New York City to give everyone a critic position who deserved one. And because there are so many people who would- hell, and do- write about film even without a paycheck, the so-called “professionals” sometimes feel threatened by them for diluting the influence they might have held back in the old days. It reminds me of Nielsen ratings- forty or fifty years ago, the most popular television shows regularly drew in upwards of 35-40% of the audience, whereas now this phenomenon is reserved for special-event programming. The reason is because of the rise of cable television, which given far more choices to a viewing audience that was once only given three at a time, plus local programming.
Now, this isn’t a categorically good or bad thing, but a simple fact of the market- given more choices, people are more inclined to seek out what suits them instead of just sticking with the options they once had. This is just as true of movie criticism as it is of television. The difference is that some old-line critics (hello, Armond White) have fought tooth and nail against this paradigm shift, lashing out against the so-called upstarts and resorting to name-calling and insults. However, by creating a rift between the classical model and the newfangled Web-based model, I can’t help but wonder if the ones who resist the shift to a criticism that’s primarily driven by the Internet are signing their own career death warrants. After all, to quote Ellis in No Country for Old Men, you can’t stop what’s comin’.
That’s why I have such admiration for what you’re doing here. Rather than sticking to your printed-page guns, you’ve embraced the newer medium, lending the blog format a measure of class and showing the youngsters how it’s supposed to be done. Moreover, you’ve built up a community of fellow bloggers and kindred spirits, something that isn’t possible- or at least feasible- with a strictly newspaper-based format. This is only natural, since talking about movies has always drawn people together, and the Web has allowed for more far-flung communities than ever before, as evidenced by the contributors and correspondents found here. And this isn’t a unique phenomenon by any means, as groups of bloggers and writers often come together to form communities that can be either short-term (witness any number of blogathons occurring throughout the blogosphere) or long-term (as you’ll find places like The House Next Door).
As for the nature of being a movie critic, I’m in agreement that while it’s rarely a career anymore, it’s as much a vocation as it ever was. And truth be told, I think that the influx of writers who aren’t simply “movie people” will ultimately be a good thing for criticism. It’s one thing to be thoroughly versed in cinema, but another entirely to be cinema-savvy to the detriment of everything else. To see a movie strictly through the lens of other movies makes for a tiresome read, in my experience. The cinema has always drawn on a wealth of outside influences- literature, art, music, and theatre, to name the most obvious examples- that to be ignorant of them is to dismiss their impact on the cinematic medium. Likewise, by being mindful of other media that influence cinema will also help you to better appreciate the unique qualities and pleasures only the cinema can provide. But it goes deeper than that. If one’s education is diverse and eclectic, I believe that gives one a level of wisdom and insight that cannot be obtained from movies alone.
Well, I think I’ve occupied enough of your time. I just want to reiterate that I have the deepest admiration for what you’ve been doing here. Keep up the fine work!
I couldn't agree more. So many talented writers out there and so much great stuff to read; from thoughtful insights on artistic films to humorous musings on B-movie classics. More than anything I just love the exchange of thoughts and ideas. I’m sure we all have our favorite sites and blogs that we return to time and time again. It’s like discussing movies with a group of friends that you’ve never met. I need to make more time to write in my blog. Years ago I had amassed a large number of movie reviews but lost all the original text files. So I recently started over with a new site. Just like you said, the reason we write (and read) is because we love our chosen subject of study. I know I’ll never stop.
Wonderful post. When most are heralding the death of film criticism, hear you are openly promoting that it is merely changing mediums. That is something that is never discussed seriously. If anything, blogging is better than what passes for mainstream criticism. Bloggers like me do it out of love for cinema - something I wonder if some "mainstream critics" even possess.
Thank you for this piece. I have been writing a blog for a bit over a year, sporadically but really for myself anyways. Friends suggested I try to parlay this into a career, even though I am a middle-aged husband and father. I made some tentative prods in the area of journalism, even going so far as to ask the local newspaper editor for some advice on how to proceed. She was...non-committal. Your piece answered almost every question I had and provided some great insight I didn't expect.
I'm a little late to the party here, but I'm a little dismayed at the disparagement and back-handed compliments film bloggers have been getting from some of the commenters. (And thanks to everyone who sees the value of film blogging!) I put a lot of time and work into my film blog and travel at my own expense to film festivals to inform my readers about alternative viewing options. And I read many other film bloggers who bring the same sense of passion and professionalism to their work. We don't catch every typo or subject/verb disagreement, that's true. But we do take an enormous amount of pride in our work (and fix those grammatical errors when noticed). It's great to see this post, which counters a very tired critique of online film criticism by Clarence Page that you, Roger, tweeted out. It's mind-numbing how unoriginal and uninformed many print pundits remain, but I was surprised to see it from Page, who usually does a great job.
Mr. Ebert,
I realize I have already commented once on this blog, but I came back to it today and read many more of the comments. While Websites like IMDb and AICN sadden me about the level of mediocre film discussion that pollutes most film sites, there is indeed a thirst for intellectual film criticism out there. This blog has had some of the most intellectually curious and unique views on cinema I've seen in a long time. And your suggestions are greatly appreciated.
It has encouraged me to resurrect a film and popular culture art aesthetics blog I created for an American Pop Culture class last year. It may not be my day job, but if I can actually get some followers for it this time, I'll send you the link.
Thanks,
A Fan
I've been writing about film since the early 1980s (I used to fill spiral-bound notebooks with movie reviews--when I want to wince at my younger self, I'll read some of them). I've always written to hear myself think. The internet has given me the opportunity to let other people hear my thoughts. I don't get a lot of traffic, but I don't care, really. I'm not in it for money. I have a day job that I love. But the people who HAVE connected with me through the internet who share my love of movies have enriched my life immeasurably.
So, for that matter, has your site. Thanks.
reading this essay gives me the impression that I should be writing reviews for any media I get my hands on. When I started my blog a month ago I thought it would be frivolous to write reviews of anything recent since there are professionals who do the same thing. However your essay implies that I should write a review for anyone who would listen as soon as I have a thought-out opinion. This certainly isn't a bad idea as I would have no storage of topics to write.
You can read my blog "public enemy number #2" if you like even though it's not supposed to be about anything specific every post so far has been about video games for some reason.
Also Ebert you may have gotten this before but were your abnormally tech savvy for someone your age. My parents can barely do e-mail and you are writing a blog, and informative to her feet and after losing your voice (only physically of course) out of solution in technology.
i know they're not bloggers, but your fellow chicagoans adam and mattie do some nice stuff on the filmspotting podcast.
As someone who's still trying to find my voice in the world of movie criticism, I read this article with great interest. Like those you've mentioned, I write (and not particularly adeptly) because I love the movies, I loathe movies-by-numbers, and I want others to find out about little gems that would otherwise be unheard of. If just one extra person sees, say, 'Shotgun Stories' because I loved it, I would feel it was all worthwhile.
Various and asundry:
There was a T-Shirt, then it got snuck into a beautiful, beautiful song.
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans."
Plan for life, do what you love. Apply your mind. The days will go by.
It is all about the spread of information. Share what you know, and you will learn more. Write what you know, and you will read more.
And on another note, how are you able to read all these posts, all these blogs, all these books, see all these movies, travel to all these places, meet all these people, and do all of your writing? Can you suspend time?
I've wanted to be a film critic for about eight years now. This last semester taught me oodles in Feminist and Queer Theory, Lacanian and Cinepsychoanalysis, Marxist and Structuralist thinking, and this summer I plan on learning Trauma Theory to toss some more stuff onto the pile.
I visit six different news sites daily, frequent an exceptionally good blog on sociology and images, and keep on on the latest entertainment trends.
My friend and I recently started our website where I hope to reach at least three or four other people. This week I reviewed Leap Year and Tooth Fairy, then began my dissection of Kieslowski's The Decalogue.
I don't know if I'll ever make a living on doing this sort of thing, but I love it, and it's keeping me sane as I trudge through my silly corporate job.
I know you used to teach a class on The Decalogue Roger, I hope that my dissection would earn at least a C once done.
Please keep encouraging all of us to keep writing.
Thank you very much for the discourse on criticism. You've long been one of my favorite film critics (the other being, oddly enough, Mr. Berardinelli), and I appreciate the advice for aspiring critics. I studied philosophy in school, not locking myself into any one profession, and ended up selling copiers business to business. When I was let go from that position I started a small website on which to publish a mix of film reviews, just so that they would be out there. You're spot on: I just wanted a place for my work to be available, even though I get little traffic.
At the same time, I've learned so much more since starting the website and exploring more of the arts and technology than I did during all of school. Learning more has enabled me to think more clearly, critique more appropriately, and has made me a more enlightened and valuable (business-wise) individual.
Thank you again for the article; it struck a great number of chords with me.
Nice entry, Mr. Ebert. Glad to see that you pointed out the usefulness of sites devoted towards certain genres. Horror especially is one that has a huge online presence, and we take great pride in delivering insightful and in-depth takes on a genre that is otherwise mostly written off by non-devotees.
www.oh-the-horror.com
Actually, for folks wanting to make some money at blogging, it's not impossible to do it.
I was actually working as a paid film blogger for awhile over at www.examiner.com. A lot of sites like that one have been popping up lately where they recruit local experts to do reporting for them. And boy was I raking it in folks, why sometimes I was earning as much as $25 a month (yes, really, you can't make things like that up). I actually had a lot of fun doing it but had to quit because the demand on my time wasn't worth it (they wanted 3-4 articles a week and to do that I was putting in about 4-6 hours a week for the above pay). It had other perks too, though. I wound up being contacted by the woman who was running the website promoting The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus and who asked me to write for her as well. She's also asked me to carry on with the eventual Don Quixote site she'll be making, assuming (and everyone cross your fingers and knock on wood while holding a four leaf clover) Gilliam's actually able to get it made this time. So even though the pay wasn't great it wound up being an enriching experience for me. It's also got me thinking I'd like to set up another film blog, though this time it will be an unpaid one that I get to do on my own time and my own terms, which, personally, I'd say is the way to go. The people you