Topic: Roger Ebert is an Idiot

[Critter]

That's right, I went there. I used to think he was a great film reviewer but recently the more things I read of him the more frustratingly narrow-minded he seems. This article entitled "Video Games can never be art" is a prime example of this:

Having once made the statement above, I have declined all opportunities to enlarge upon it or defend it. That seemed to be a fool's errand, especially given the volume of messages I receive urging me to play this game or that and recant the error of my ways. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that in principle, video games cannot be art. Perhaps it is foolish of me to say "never," because never, as Rick Wakeman informs us, is a long, long time. Let me just say that no video gamer now living will survive long enough to experience the medium as an art form.

That is just a small amount of the idiocy poured out into this article.
Ebert argues that storytelling in games could never equal that of great filmmakers, poets, writers etc. This guy obviously lives under a rock or hasn't played any games if he thinks that. I have played some games with stories much more compelling than films of the same genre, stories where the characters grow and develop and we travel with them and learn to care for these characters in ways that some films are yet to achieve. And in the end who is he to tell the whole world that games can never be art? Art is different to each induvidual person, I have read some amazing poetry, some fantastic novels and watched some great films, but in the end I have also played some equally as beautiful games.

I could rant a while longer here but in the end the 4,000+ comments after the article (most of which are explaining to Ebert how much he doesn't understand modern gaming) really do the job for me.

I know this article has been around a while but if you haven't seen it yet here it is.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/04/video_games_can_never_be_art.html

[Dragonfire]

He can be...overly judgmental at times.  I've frequently not agreed with his reviews.

[Critter]

I think that he is a clever person but he has too high of an opinion of himself. It's clouding his judgment and now he is even degrading something without even having experienced it. It's hard to writer a review for a film when you haven't watched it, even harder to dismiss all video games when you don't play them.

[Dragonfire]

Yup I agree.  I would never attempt a movie review if I hadn't seen the movie...or if I had only seen part of the movie.

He does seem to be a bit...arrogant with his opinions on movies at times..like his is the only one that matters.

[Critter]

Yes I agree about that with his film reviews. But at least you know he has seen the film, and it is just one film.

In this article he is saying that all video games can never be art. I mean really, who does he think he is, God? "all" and "never" are very big words to be using in an argument such as this one, very stupid words too.

[Dragonfire]

That's true.  If he doesn't like games, he should just say that and leave it be instead of making such a huge sweeping statement.

[Alien Redrum]

I think that he is a clever person but he has too high of an opinion of himself.

That is a brilliant synopsis of him. I think he's quite intelligent, but man he's an arrogant ass at times.

[Achim]

I think that he is a clever person but he has too high of an opinion of himself.

That is a brilliant synopsis of him. I think he's quite intelligent, but man he's an arrogant ass at times.

This is still about Roger Ebert, is it?

Sorry.

[snowcat]

To be honest the man is entitles to his opinion even if you disagree. He's not an idiot that's his opinion and your opinion is never wrong even if he is generalising. Roger Ebert is a smart guy but how many people do you honestly think really listen to him? Is anyone going to stop playing video games or watching a film he called bad? I guess it's a question of taste. Remember it's roger eberts job to have an opinion, no use criticising him for his job hes not gonna care when he sees his large cheque land on his door step.

[Najemikon]

I've never liked the idea of being able to hide behind "it's my opinion". An opinion can certainly be wrong due to being misinformed and you should always be willing to learn the opposite. Roger Ebert is arrogant.

However, he does have a point!

Games are not art. They are artistic, creative and brilliant, but lack the singular purpose, influence and have too much of an ulterior motive to be "art" as such.

The very fact they are interactive stuffs them up straight away. Art is passive because it's the artists way of communicating an idea. So while there is art within a game, a game itself is too undisciplined to be art.

I'm not degrading the talent in any way. In fact, consider something like the messy room that Tracey Emmin or whatever her name is, put on display. It was just an unmade bed with rubbish around it. It required zero talent. But it is art, because it can illicit a reaction from the viewer that is specific to the idea of the artist.

[snowcat]

...Jon an opinion is an opinion is an opinion.

Its not about being able to hide, he says in the article that he doesn't care how misinformed he is   he doesn't care so why should we?

Jon, I agree with what you say about video games, however I think you are wrong about opinions, its not about hiding behind one its about YOUR opinions.

Now, I might say that Transformers 2 is the best film in the universe ever, who is to say I am wrong? I know a kid who watched that film 8 times at the cinema, he has two copies of the DVD he watched it all the time, he knows the diologue off by heart to him its his favourite film and therefor the "best" in his opinion.... thats not wrong, thats his opinion  

Edit: Of course.... this is my opinion so... who's to say im right?

[Critter]

Games are not art. They are artistic, creative and brilliant, but lack the singular purpose, influence and have too much of an ulterior motive to be "art" as such.

I still can't quite grasp this, some people seem to believe that the term art can mean only a specific realm of things and then that's it, nothing else! Isn't art one of the most subjective things in the world? Isn't what is to be considered art in the eyes of the beholder?

I love art, so much so that I studied it for years at school, and really, who is to say that games can't be art? I have witnessed art in both the traditional and the modern manner. I spent two days in Paris roaming the halls of the Louvre; I spent another day in St Petersburg exploring The Hermitage museum. I have watched truly amazing films and had amazing cinema experiences, I have visited the theatre many times and consider all of these things to be art, yet I also consider video games to be art, and why shouldn’t I?

I once studied an artist who took the roof off a house, stripped the house of furniture and then filled the entire thing with cement. She then removed the walls of the house and what was left was essentially a big block of cement in the shape of a house. This was a very powerful piece of art, and it represented a lot, especially to the artist yet it was torn down by the council after hundreds of complaints stating that this cement block was “not art”. How can these people judge whether this piece should be art or not? Who has the right to write off someone else’s work just because they dislike it or do not understand it?

In the same way why should video games be written off as not being an art form when many people consider films to be an art form? Video games are in many ways, nothing more than extended an interactive film, yet only films get the treatment of being considered “art”? Great films require many elements till completion; they need stories, music, mise-en-scene etc. A good video game also has all of these aspects but in the end gives more freedom to the consumer, yet this isn’t art? They both take us on a journey, they both tell a story, and in both cases… the story is the one that the products creators wanted to tell.

I believe that art is anything that moves or inspires induvidual people. Roger Ebert may not think that video games are art personally, but to express his opinion in such a brutal way… stating that they will never be art as long as any of us live is again his view, yet he is enforcing it as if it is factual, which it is not.

[Kathy]

Sorry to disagree but games are not art...in my opinion!

To me, art must be something that moves me - it touches my soul. No video game has the capacity to do that.

[lyonsden5]

I don't follow Mr. Ebert any more. I haven't since Siskel passed away. I do think he isn't too far off base here though.

However! I also feel that many things classified as "art" these days are far from it. The best example of that I can think of is the one with the crucifix sitting in a glass jar full of urine.     If that is art then Super Mario is the freggin Mona Lisa 

I think that he is a clever person but he has too high of an opinion of himself.

That is a brilliant synopsis of him. I think he's quite intelligent, but man he's an arrogant ass at times.

This is still about Roger Ebert, is it?

Sorry.

[Critter]

I don't follow Mr. Ebert any more. I haven't since Siskel passed away. I do think he isn't too far off base here though.

However! I also feel that many things classified as "art" these days are far from it. The best example of that I can think of is the one with the crucifix sitting in a glass jar full of urine.     If that is art then Super Mario is the freggin Mona Lisa 

I think that he is a clever person but he has too high of an opinion of himself.

That is a brilliant synopsis of him. I think he's quite intelligent, but man he's an arrogant ass at times.

This is still about Roger Ebert, is it?

Sorry.

I had to write my final art exam on that crucifix sitting in a jar of urine. After studying it for almost half a year, countless essays... Let's just say in the end I was so God damn sick of it. It wasn't just urine by the way, it also had blood and semen mixed in. Oh Piss Christ, how I don't miss studying you.