At the bottom of this article, in the “By the numbers” section, Ebert throws this out there:
What’s his problem? Sure, J. Lo hasn’t made a decent film since Out of Sight, but he gave Changing Lanes 4 Stars and The Sum of All fears 3 1/2 stars, so why the sudden venom? “BaF”?
This sort of pot-shot seems beneath him. Is there any history there? Maybe they snubbed him at Sundance or something?
Since when does a man who gave Sum Of All Fears 3 1/2 stars get taken seriously as a reviewer? I don’t want to say Ebert is slipping, but I think Richard Roeper’s stupidity may be rubbing off on Ebert.
About the Lopez and Affleck comment, maybe he’s allergic to hype. Or maybe he’s noticed that as her movies get worse and worse, and her music gets blander and more forgettable, we hear more and more about her as her publicity machine goes into overdrive. Or maybe he just needed a cute way to wrap up his Oscar numbers rundown. Lopez and Affleck and have garnered much more attention during the past year for being famous and in love (so we are told) than for their professional efforts; and they are easy targets.
Roger needed something on his list to represent “0”, and they were what came into his mind. I’d say that the hype around Lopez (who, over the last couple of years, has failed to prove to me in any way that she’s talented) got to him. Remember, he does haev weird taste.
Ebert is, or was, huge fan of Lopez and her … assets. He raved about her in Selena and Out of Sight. He even gave favorable reviews to Anaconda and The Cell, for heaven’s sake.
So I’d put it down to Ben Affleck jealousy, pure and simple.