The movie that killed respectable film criticism, according to Roger Ebert: “Ignorant gawking”
Roger Ebert watched many movies during his time as a leading American film critic, having started his post at the Chicago Sun-Times in 1967, which he continued until his passing in 2013… Naturally, he saw how film criticism evolved over the years, with the medium increasingly becoming less exciting than it once was.
There was a time when figures like Pauline Kael dominated the landscape with cutting reviews written in glorious prose – long essays on the virtues and flaws of a film that actually flowed with real artistry. Of course, these days figures like Mark Kermode and Peter Bradshaw are some of the most well-known critics who are widely read and respected, but the art of long-form written film criticism has undeniably changed and become much rarer.
With the emergence of the internet, websites like Reddit and Letterboxd have allowed film criticism to become a more accessible yet diluted medium, with quippy one-liners written with the hopes of getting loads of likes, much more common on the latter site than a considered review. Then there’s the ‘critics’ who take to TikTok, presenting a thinly-veiled advert for a movie as a ‘review’.
In a landscape now dominated by short-form content, it’s no surprise that long-form written content that dives into the merits of a film has become less desirable for consumers. Ebert was not happy about the changing direction of film criticism back in the early 2010s, when he rallied against the Associated Press imposing a 500-word limit on its entertainment writers, which included film critics.
He saw a certain movie as contributing to the decline in film criticism, highlighting how it simply encourages gossip rather than astute writing. “The CelebCult virus is eating our culture alive, and newspapers voluntarily expose themselves to it. It teaches shabby values to young people, festers unwholesome curiosity, violates privacy, and is indifferent to meaningful achievement,” he wrote.
Ebert took aim at Twilight, the 2008 vampire romance that caused a sensation among teenagers (and many middle-aged mums, don’t forget), with endless midnight screenings and devoted fans declaring themselves Team Jacob or Team Edward. This phenomenon, which saw teens go crazy over the actors in the movie, baffled Ebert.
“As the CelebCult triumphs, major newspapers have been firing experienced film critics,” he said. “They want to devote less of their space to considered prose, and more to ignorant gawking. What they require doesn’t need to be paid for out of their payrolls.”
Adding, “Why does the biggest story about Twilight involve its fans? Do we need interviews with 16-year-old girls about Robert Pattinson? When was the last time they read a paper? Isn’t the movie obviously about sexual abstinence and the teen fascination with doomy Goth death-flirtation?”
Clearly, Ebert wasn’t the biggest fan of Twilight, nor did he like the way it was discussed by many outlets, which focused on the more superficial aspects of the movie – mainly what was going on behind the scenes, whether the actors were single, whether R Patz and K Stew were dating, and why teenagers were going so crazy over it.
But let’s be real, gossip rags have always existed in some form or another, and it wasn’t Twilight that led to the downfall of traditional film criticism. Rather, celebrity culture has only continued to grow with the popularisation of tabloid magazines in the 2000s, as well as the rise of social media. Whether Twilight had been made or not, film criticism would always have evolved.
