The Roger Ebert Story: "Missing Link" Between Film Critics and Certain Sandals

[cannedpeahes]

I was reading movie reviews recently (one good film does not a summer make), and came across this review of Wanted; it struck me as kind of a generic  shoot-'em-up knockoff, so I was intrigued when I noticed it had a higher score than "art" flick Kabluey. Of course, I had to see where this type of score came from, so I started reading the snippets of reviews that Metacritic highlighted under the synopsis. I came across this bit by Roger Ebert.

The way to enjoy this film is to put your logic on hold, along with any higher sensitivities that might be vulnerable and immerse yourself as if in a video game.

Most gamers, I think, recollect (and still talk about) the fiasco from '05 when Ebert suggested that games, because of the nature of their content and the way it is conveyed to the player, cannot definitively be "art". He reneged from the snob camp some weeks later, ceding that games could be art, but not "high art". And now... this. Whatever this is.

I'm not proposing that this is Mr. Ebert recanting, but his opinion of games seems to change radically given time. This, I respect; I don't believe it's proper to accuse somebody of changing their position, because that's really the way things ought to be . But I do see his opinion of the medium drifting not-so-subtly.

Not to dig up the hatchet, but what does this say to you guys? If this could segue into a "games 'r' arts" debate, that'd be pretty cool. Of course, "games are art" isn't a statement you'd probably find much argument about amongst gamers, I know.

[Budr]

Merely to counter the exaggerated verbosity of your argument, I shall endeavour to reply in as succinct and concise a manner as possible:

Ebert equals prick.

[fyre]

If this could segue into a "games 'r' arts" debate, that'd be pretty cool.

This is a really stupid argument IMO. It all depends on your definition of art. The most relevant definition from Merriam-Webster defines "fine arts" as "...concerned primarily with the creation of beautiful objects". Therefore any medium, while not necessarily art itself, is capable of producing art. Or maybe not. I don't really care.

Ebert equals prick.

Nooo....I like Ebert.

[Budr]

[quote author=Budr link=topic=900.msg23143#msg23143 date=1216553811]
Ebert equals prick.

Nooo....I like Ebert.
[/quote]

To be honest the whole idea of art critiquing seems futile to me. Granted, there are certain objectively quantifiable elements in movies: technical competence in cinematography, well structured and formed writing, sound mixing, etc. However, many of the key filmic elements and even some I just listed can be hugely subjective to taste.

[Dave]

Evaluating art achieves nothing, its just there so pricks who wear berets can make money.

[CaffeinePowered]

Evaluating art achieves nothing, its just there so pricks who wear berets can make money.

[rumsfald]

let's have a TV as art debate instead.

On one hand we have Twin Peaks, on the other we have the 11th season of Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire.

The medium (TV or Video Games) has nothing to do with the artistic quality of the individual games/shows.

Oh, and Will Ferrel is the Ubisoft of cinema spam.

[Neonie]

Oh, and Will Ferrel is "Lighting bolt! Lighting bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lighting bolt! Lighting bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lighting bolt! Lighting bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lighting bolt! Lighting bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lighting bolt! Lighting bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lighting bolt! Lighting bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lighting bolt! Lighting bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lighting bolt! Lighting bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lighting bolt! Lighting bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt!"

I would like to state: A. Fixed. B. I don't mean it in a good way.

[Neonie]

On the actual topic: As someone who tries to see art value in most things, I do see videogames as art in their own right, sometimes in script. But usually when it's done in 2D (especially todays 2D) when it can look absolutely brilliant. You tell me a sprite isn't art and I will be absolutely stunned. 

But if anything with a script an be art does that mean...? Yes, things on T.V. can be art too (not reality shows though, fuck them).

[Dave]

On the actual topic: As someone who farts in bed then lifts the covers to breath it in in its purest form

THE TRUTH COMES OUT

hippies


fuck em.

[fyre]

Evaluating art achieves nothing, its just there so pricks who wear berets can make money.

hippies


fuck em.

Now you're really making me sad, Dave. :'(

[Tragic Hero]

hippies

fuck em.

Proper fuck em?

[Dave]

[quote author=Dave link=topic=900.msg23211#msg23211 date=1216572494]

hippies

fuck em.

Proper fuck em?
[/quote]


in the face.

[cannedpeahes]

Merely to counter the exaggerated verbosity of your argument, I shall endeavour to reply in as succinct and concise a manner as possible:

Ebert equals prick.

It was deliberate.

It was also very, very late