Roger Ebert's Final Film Review Was a Near-Perfect Score for a Malick Film

A Critic's Final Word

The last piece of film criticism from Roger Ebert was not for a commercial spectacle but for an elliptical art film. Two days before his death on April 4, 2013, Ebert’s review for Terrence Malick’s “To the Wonder” was published on his website. He awarded the film 3.5 out of 4 stars, a strong recommendation that served as an unplanned but fitting coda to a singular career. The review was a final testament to his enduring belief in cinema’s power to grapple with life's most profound questions, a characteristic that defined his work for nearly five decades.

In his assessment, Ebert acknowledged the film’s divisive nature, which featured sparse dialogue and an impressionistic narrative structure. He described Malick's method as seeking “to be in a state of grace” and praised the film's visual splendor and emotional core, even while noting it would prove challenging for many viewers. “A film of great beauty and deep feeling, and it is unapologetic about it,” he wrote. This nuance, a hallmark of his criticism, offered a final example of his ability to engage with a work on its own terms and articulate its ambitions to a wide audience.

The timing of the review’s publication was poignant. On April 2, 2013, the same day the review went live, Ebert published a blog post titled “A Leave of Presence.” In it, he announced a recurrence of his cancer and his decision to step back from the demanding pace of daily reviewing. He was not, however, signing off. Instead, he framed it as a transition, promising to write only about the films that particularly moved him. “To the Wonder” became the first, and last, film of that new era.

The Subject of the Final Review

Terrence Malick’s “To the Wonder” was in many ways the archetypal film for an Ebert endorsement. Starring Ben Affleck, Olga Kurylenko, and Rachel McAdams, the movie eschews conventional storytelling in favor of a lyrical exploration of love, faith, and disenchantment. Upon its release, the film polarized both critics and audiences, with some finding its abstract style to be transcendent and others viewing it as self-indulgent. Its box office performance was negligible, grossing just over $2.8 million worldwide according to industry trackers.

Ebert, however, had long been a champion of Malick’s esoteric vision. He had previously defended the director’s other demanding works, including “The Tree of Life,” which he awarded a full four stars and named the best film of 2011. His final review continued this tradition, providing a critical bulwark for a filmmaker whose work often requires a defense. By giving his final professional assessment to a quiet, meditative film, Ebert implicitly made a statement about the kind of cinema he valued most: personal, ambitious, and unafraid of grappling with the ineffable.

This final piece of criticism was not an isolated event but the culmination of a long relationship with the director's filmography. It reflected Ebert's consistent willingness to engage with artists who pushed the boundaries of the medium. For his millions of readers, the review served as a final reminder that for Ebert, a film's commercial success was far less important than its artistic integrity and its capacity to evoke wonder.

A Legacy Beyond the Thumbs

Roger Ebert was arguably the most influential film critic in American history, but his legacy extends far beyond his film reviews. He was the first film critic to win the Pulitzer Prize for Criticism in 1975, a distinction that lent legitimacy to the entire field. His long-running television programs with Gene Siskel, including “Siskel & Ebert & The Movies,” brought film criticism into mainstream living rooms, popularizing the “two thumbs up” system that became a universally understood seal of approval.

In the final decade of his life, after losing his lower jaw and the ability to speak due to cancer, Ebert reinvented himself as a prolific digital voice. His platform, RogerEbert.com, became home not just to reviews but to his “Journal,” a blog where he wrote with remarkable candor and eloquence about his health, politics, science, and the human condition. He became an early and avid adopter of Twitter, using the platform to share insights and engage directly with a new generation of followers. This digital act transformed him from a revered critic into a beloved public intellectual.

This evolution ensured his relevance in a media landscape that was rapidly changing. While many of his print-era contemporaries struggled to adapt, Ebert embraced the internet’s immediacy and interactivity. His generosity, curiosity, and profoundly human prose cemented a bond with his audience that transcended the simple act of recommending movies. It was this broader identity that made his passing feel like the loss of not just a critic, but a conversation partner.

An Unplanned Finale

The review for “To the Wonder” stands as a bookend to a career that began in 1967 at the Chicago Sun-Times. It wasn't a planned farewell, but its content and subject feel resonant. Ebert concluded his review by reflecting on the film's spiritual dimensions, a fitting theme for a man confronting his own mortality with such public grace. The review embodied his principle of empathy, which he often cited as the most essential tool for both art and life.

Ultimately, the piece is best understood in conjunction with his “Leave of Presence” announcement. He was not retiring but recalibrating, preparing for a new chapter of writing with a different focus. He had plans to relaunch his website and bring on new contributors. That he passed just 48 hours later turns his final works into an unintentional but powerful summary of his critical ethos: an embrace of art that challenges, a commitment to nuanced discussion, and a deep, abiding love for the movies.