Roger Ebert Regrets Reviewing Movie He Only Watched For 8 Minutes

Roger Ebert survived a battle with thyroid and salivary gland cancer with his prodigious mind still intact, but ever since his notorious binder-thwacking at the hands of Lou Lumenick, things have been a little… askew. First, Rog stumped his audience with an ode to creationism that seemed more appropriate for Free Republic than the Chicago Sun-Times (later, he informed us it was just satire). Now, Ebert is in hot water after posting a review of the gay independent film Tru Loved that he admits at the end was written after watching only eight minutes. The one-star review is here, his original disclaimer is here, and Ebert’s attempt to walk back the firestorm is after the jump:

Why do you wish you hadn’t published the review? It sent a wrong message. If I had seen the entire film, a review, however negative, would have been appropriate. But in reviewing the first eight minutes, I was guilty of too much affection for my prose. I finished the review and liked it. My editor was awaiting the review. I sent it in. Many writers are loath to see any of their immortal words be, as we quaintly say in the newsbiz, shit-canned. They should be less loath. Laura Emerick flagged it. She was correct.

Was the review unethical? No. I made it clear I had seen only eight minutes, and that the star rating applied only to those eight minutes. If I had concealed that fact, I should have been fired.

What is the key lesson from all of this? I will never, ever, again review a film I have not seen in its entirety. Never. Ever. Laura was right: That sort of thing is seized upon as a practice, not an exception. Already you can learn here and there on the web that I support Creationism. (See my blog entry, “This is the dawning of the Age of Credulity.”) Soon, I am sure, you will be able to read, “Ebert reviews movies after only watching eight minutes of them.”

Amusingly, Ebert has since watched the entire film and appended his original article with a new review that is, if anything, even more vicious. For a critic who’s handed out four-star reviews like candy in recent years (Lakeview Terrace? really?), it’s a bracing change of pace. We’re kind of digging this new, unhinged Ebert — now, Rog, when are you finally going to fill in that notable gap in your recent reviews and dig into Beverly Hills Chihuahua? Bet you wish you’d saved your eight-minute card for that one, huh?

• Definitely Read Me Second [Roger Ebert via MCN]