Who's your favourite critic? (1 Viewer)

[Bruce Hedtke]

Mike Clark or Owen Glieberman.

Bruce

 

[Patrick McCart]

Ebert.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

That depends:
I trust Ebert. He's a film-scholar, but we certainly don't always see eye-to-eye. But I always respect him.
Scott Weinberg is my HTF guy, and I am glad I found him. When I first joined HTF, I wondered who this guy was with my opinions! Anyways, he's got very similar taste to mine, and that's key in a critic.
And www.mrcranky.com is my favorite review site. It has little to do with the film, but it's consistently entertaining (usually more than the movie), and often eye-opening and insightful. But never positive
Take care,
Chuck

 

[Michael Caicedo]

I'd like to join in on the Roger Ebert love fest I miss Gene Siskel. One thing about Siskel and Ebert, if both agreed on a film, thumbs up or down, they were almost infallible. James Berardinelli I agree is also excellent. I just recently started reading Scott Weinberg's reviews and so far so good (i.e. Pearl Harbor & Count of Monte Cristo)

 

[Darren H]

If you want to see why I scream profanity everytime I make the mistake of reading a film review in my local paper . . .
Link Removed

 

[John Berggren]

It goes without saying that my favorite "critic" is Roger Ebert. I've really enjoyed his film and industry criticism, as well as his historical perspective on both.

I've been a fan of Roger Ebert since first he explained the process of letterboxing films to "me" - via his and Gene Siskel's weekly show that is.

 

[Rain]

I like Ebert not because I agree with him more often than others and not even because he is knowledgeable, but because he clearly loves film.

I like Maltin's book, but I don't care much for Maltin. Admittedly, I have seen many films just because they got 4 star reviews in the book. In such cases, I have only very rarely been disappointed. However, the book is a collaborative effort and reflects more than just the one guy's opinion. It does bug me that many movies over 2 hours long are called "overlong." That's not a valid criticism, IMHO.

Rolling Stone magazine should simply stop publishing movie reviews altogether.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

When I first started getting into movies, I watched Siskel and Ebert. After watching these guys for a while, I began to notice that I would tend to agree with Roger Ebert's opinion very often.
Through the years, he is still the one that I agree with more than any other. This is important! I can usually trust his reviews and recommendations about 80% of the time, which is pretty good!
Combine that with the fact that this guy is very knowledgeable and loves film makes him my personal favorite.

 

[MatthewA]

My favorite critic is intelligent, trustworthy, has eclectic taste, is generally without arrogance and pretension, and is someone very close to me.

That critic is...

ME!

That being said, I do have a great deal of respect for Roger Ebert. I don't always agree with him (Song of the South, anyone?), but I admire his stance on OAR.

I also feel that Leonard Maltin, while not my favorite critic, has a great wealth of film knowledge that cannot be denied.

 

[Jon_Are]

Seeking out a critic with whom you always agree is pointless. Rather, you should look for a critic whose writing you admire, who provokes thought, who is knowledgeable about film history, and whose views are relatively consistent. Once you identify a critic who meets these criteria (for you), you are both armed with enough information to make good choices and entertained. Whether you mostly agree with the reviewer is largely irrelevant.
That said, I enjoy the following:
Roger Ebert. I've admired his work a long time, going back to the days when he and Gene Siskel had their first (PBS) show, At the Movies. What places Ebert high on my list, besides his writing skill, is his unabashed love for movies.
(the late) Pauline Kael. Long-time New Yorker critic. Some find her work stuffy, but I appreciated her insight and depth. (she had deep depth )
Anthony Lane. A current New Yorker reviewer. Has the usual good stuff, but also shows a brilliant sense of humor coupled with a razor wit and a bit of a nasty streak when confronted with Hollywood Crap-Ola. His reviews of films he dislikes are the best; some are works of art.
Terry Lawson. A local guy (Detroit Free Press) who I've come to appreciate. His reviews are often found within http://www.rottentomatoes.com
Jon

 

[Gabe D]

Perhaps I shouldn't participate because, although I love films, I do not enjoy reading film critics.

I have noticed, however, that I'm more likely to agree with Peter Travers of Rolling Stone than any other major critic. His taste doesn't mirror mine, but it's closer than anybody else I've found. Much, much closer than Ebert.

While there is no critic I particularly like, there are several that I particularly dislike. But I guess that's not really the topic, is it?

 

[Jon_W]

My favourite critic is myself because only I know what I will like and not like. I only read reviews to catch films that I might not otherwise take notice of.

 

[Duane_T]

The Big E(bert).