Ebert was known to change his opinions later on and while he was an interesting critic, he was still a tosser.
Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Fuck that pompous asshole and the goddamn goat he rode in on.
You've seen Guy Standeven in something because the man was in everything.

It did (and does) indeed. And why the hell is it considered a horror film? It's a violent revenge melodrama.
There are 8.2 billion people in the world. 8.19 billion of them have never heard of and don't give a fuck about Charlie Kirk. Get over it.

last house on the left did suck
The Fearmakers Blog
https://thefearmakers.blogspot.com/

Ebert did try to make a movie once. The results were pretty much what you'd expect.
There are 8.2 billion people in the world. 8.19 billion of them have never heard of and don't give a fuck about Charlie Kirk. Get over it.

Arghblaahhhhh! In light of IMDB's imminent shutdown of message boards, just had to let that out. I very much agree with his LHOTL critique, tho certainly not with all his reviews. He often struck me as too eager to give 4 star ratings. But I respect the passion both he and Gene had for film! If there is any sort of afterlife, someday I will hunt those two down to pick their brains on various movies.

God bless M.Ebert's soul and no offence to him but I strongly disagreed with many of his reviews, his The Brood review being one of those where I thought he was way off. And one of the most outrageous reviews I have read from him is his positive review for the original The Last House on The Left, which is undoubtly one of the worst,most distasteful movie I have ever seen in my life. I thought the remake of LHOTL, however,was infinitely better and actually the best version of that plot line since Bergman's The Virgin Spring. But to be fair to M.Ebert, he did in fact change his opinions on several movies he had reviewed before.

In the movie business.
Those who can do.
Those who cannot.. Edit..
And Those who cannot edit.. become critics
Critics are often people with no creative experience themselves - however love to become a back seat producer after the event.
Walk Quietly through this Earth
Leave nothing but Smiles and Pawprints

Actually, I think "pompous, self-important toolbag" describes him (and most other critics) pretty well, and it has nothing to do with his opinions re. my favorite movies. And what "insights?" Ebert, like any other critic, was paid (
over
paid is more like it) to offer us his subjective personal opinion. His word wasn't law.
There are 8.2 billion people in the world. 8.19 billion of them have never heard of and don't give a fuck about Charlie Kirk. Get over it.

"The guy was a pompous self-important toolbag".
Not really or necessarily. That's just fanboy talk, judging a critic based on his opinion of this one treasured item as opposed to whatever insight said critic has offered over hundreds or thousands of reviews.
"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

This message has been deleted.

He was wrong about The Brood, but I totally agree that LHOTL is much better than I Spit.

There are many times I've disagreed with Roger Ebert.
Can't stop the signal.