It should pretty much go without saying that Roger Ebert was the greatest film critic of all time: he was eloquent, incendiary, insightful and deeply passionate about the art he wrote about. He was a worthy winner of a Pulitzer and a man brave enough to hang unpopular opinions out for their own criticism, famously pissing off a whole world of people by claiming that video games can never be art.
But if you thought that was the limit of his critical analysis or his fondness for making bold, sometimes downright lunatic statements, you're in for a treat. Because reading back through the great man's library of reviews yields some theories on popular films (both great and terrible side-by-side) that you would dismiss as the wild ravings of the worst kind of provocative troll if you came upon them with no context.
For Ebert's fans, the revelation that he wrote things that would inspire baffled reactions should come as no surprise, but there is a difference between saying Die Hard is terrible and claiming that Superman works better as a character because he has no personality. Not incorrect per se, but skirting the boundary of bonkers all the same.
And that's not the half of it...