Being such a smart guy, I’m assuming Ebert used the term in order to show that he’s hep to the kids and their “Lull Speak”.

1.) He based his assumptions after someone sent him a list of which movie White said was good and White said was bad. Ebert’s conclusion seems to have been based on that list alone. This shouldn’t be basis enough for a conclusion, since, in the past, Ebert has mentioned that a rating system is not an adequate reflection of one’s opinion, which is, instead, contained in the text of the review. The list that was posted is basically a rating system, one that only says whether something is either good or bad (similar to the Rotten Tomatoes, which avoids any nuance).

2.) Ebert mentions how White is a troll for liking Transformers 2 but hating Synecdoche, NY. This strikes me as odd, not because I disagree, necessarily. But would it be so difficult to run into a person who had the same opinion? As awful as the Transformers movie may be (and I’m in the “TF2 is a C+ movie” camp myself), the exit polls show that movie goers had an overwhelmingly positive experience. Thus, I’m not willing to write off White’s opinion on the movie just yet. As for rating it better than “Synecdoche, NY”: perhaps it’s possible that White just wasn’t won over by the story of a neurotic theater director from Upstate New York? That description alone would drive away most movie goes from even bothering with the movie. I think it’s a bigger possibility that White has different standards on what movies he likes. I think he’s wrong in thinking that Michael Bay creates great art, but that’s not necessarily a unique opinion as other critics. The Cahiers du Cinema have basically said the same thing for decades (and do, in fact, champion Micahel Bay).

I do agree, though, that White does go on some ridiculous tangents in his review. I find it too hard to fault him for that, though, since I’d have to call myself out.

I mean, honestly, it’s hard not to at least wonder if Mr. White is just fucking with us. I think Ebert’s right that the people who call him a troll can make a legitimate case for it.

It’s not like Ebert just dismissed White’s arguments for ad hominem reasons, which you kind of imply here.