He is arguably the father of modern film criticism and the most recognizable and well-renowned film critic on the planet. He is the only movie reviewer to be awarded a Pulitzer Prize. He is the man who introduced countless young readers such as myself to such filmmakers as Martin Scorsese and Sam Peckinpah. His prose and insights have formed the foundation on which pretty much all of today's critics operate. Yet I find myself in a position today where I am afraid to read Roger Ebert's film reviews. It is not due to any downturn in quality or any continual difference of opinion. It is not due to the notion that Ebert somehow has nothing more to offer the world of film criticism, as anyone who reads his journal will laugh at such an idea. I no longer read Ebert's reviews (prior to seeing a given movie) out of fear, the fear that he will randomly and arbitrarily reveal plot twists and climactic elements of a given movie without a warning or even a second thought. While it has always been an occasional issue, Roger Ebert has, in the last few years, turned into a full-blown spoiler.
