Title: Fails to serve its purpose
Product review: When I say that Gene Siskel was the better critic (and writer), it's not just sentiment talking. How in the heck does one give **** to so many perfectly average movies (like "L.A. Story") as Ebert does in his book? The biggest fault with this annual collection is that it completely fails in its intention. Ebert seems to think of this as a more in-depth version of Leonard Maltin's guide but who needs to read a full-length review of a movie to determine if it's worth a rental or watching on the late show? A better idea for Ebert would be to just issue a complete volume of his work through the years instead of dumping the same reviews (with some additional material to make it "new") on the market year after year.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
