I'm wary of people who claim they knew something before they "hit the big time" as a point of pride, but Ebert's the card I'd play.
I always felt there were two version of Ebert. Ebert 1.0 was everything through about 2006 or so (when he lost his voice and dropped from mainstream public view). But at the same time that Ebert was disappearing, Ebert 2.0 was developing, where it wasn't all about the movies. That's when he launched the blog and jumped onto the social networks and really became what a lot of younger people probably think of him as, and that's when I went from being aware of him to following him. As someone who was never much of a film fan, I could devour anything he wrote (much like I do with Bill Simmons and the NBA). I always thought Chris Jones’s Esquire piece in 2010 was the point where Ebert 2.0 went from “cool little secret” to “superstar”, where he wrote whatever the hell he wanted to, and it was always good, and the rest of the world found out how incredible he was. -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
