Seriously. Because the ads for his movies alone make me cringe.

You know how the comments of any article are likely to aggravate or irritate or enrage you?

Here's an opposite case.

A writer attack Roger Ebert in print, using him as a straw man for fatuous film criticism.

Immediately in the comments he is taken to school. And comment after comment completely dissects his ignorance, gracelessness, and crappy writing. But politely and thoughtfully.

Politely and thoughtfully?

Wrong. So wrong.

I once read a description of Ebert’s colonoscopy and it was more interesting and insightful than this piece.

This feels like a hipster attack at the establishment.

Either the author is naive, unread or simply envious.

You remind me of a fifth grader trying to jeerlead against the kid who dresses funny ’cause he comes from a trailer park.

Tell me, how many Pulitzer Prizes have you won for YOUR writing?

It does seem more like a draft than a finished essay, and there are a few thoughtful replies in there too, but a lot of it a dogpile.

Most of it was very polite! Like, "I see what you were going for in a critique of celebrity culture, but you don't support your argument against Ebert with specific quotes to defend your position."

Anyway, it was a deserved smackdown, in my opinion.

Movie review round-up! Featuring The Killer, Easy A, Pontypool, Knowing, Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Metropolitan, Heathers, Demolition Man, Hudson Hawk, Hackers, Dazed and Confused, Wet Hot American Summer, Family Plot, Frenzy, Psycho Beach Party, Next, and The Last Days of Disco, which, in a startling turn of events, is actually my least favorite of the Stillman movies.

P-C, you have a great way with a phrase. "Also, a Scotland Yard inspector must endure his wife's gourmet cooking," indeed.

Heh, thanks. Although I think I was basically paraphrasing the Amazon.com review for that one (in that I totally took "endure" from there, so I do not deserve much credit).

What a tool. If you ever watched "At The Movies"(at least when Siskel was on it) I always got the impression that both guys knew a lot about film analysis...they just didn't feel that geeking out about, say, Truffaut, made for mainstream television viewing. Which, outside of Buffistas, I would say is a decent call on their part. And I don't think we're supposed to take thumbs-up very seriously, or at least, Ebert does not. I would agree that Douchebag McCritic shouldn't shy away from critiquing the reviews of a cancer survivor, but it seems distasteful to take such pleasure in calling him a know-nothing that wrecked the film industry...almost like Ann Coulter, who thinks she's ballsy when she's mostly mean and stupid.(Not to make it red/blue...Maureen Dowd does the same thing sometimes...mostly not to widows and orphans, however) And he pretty much called his own mother an idiot...my mother would be pissed if I wrote about her that way, but she liked "Taxi Driver"...I think she recommended it to me.

Today is Kenneth Anger's birthday. So I wrote about him for Hilobrow.

this may be relevant to your interests.